IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9863 of 2009 Between: Miss.Potineni swetha D/o.P.Koteswara Rao R/o.Plot No.692, Road No.33, Jubilee Hills,Hyderabad rep. by her GPA Holder P.Koteshwar Rao ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State Bank of Nikaner & Jaipur, (Associate of STate Bank of India), R.P.Road, Secunderabad, rep.by its Authorised officer 2 P.V.Noyal Raj S/o.Sri.P.V.Vasudevan, R/o.Q.No.504/A, BHEL Township, Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 3 L.L.Joseph S/o.Sri Joseph, R/o.Q.No.36/A,Type II,BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 4 T.S.R.K.Prasad S/o.T.Koteswar Rao, R/o.Q.No.78/C, BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 5 Y.Sreenivasa Kumar S/o.Y.Krishnaiah, R/o.Plot No.63, B.K.Enclave Miyapur,Bollaram Road,Hyderabad 6 G.Nageswara Rao S/o.Sri.G.Devaiah, R/o.Q.No.504/C, BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 7 Ramchander S/o.Sri Viswanadam, R/o.Q.No.12/C, BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 8 K.Laxmaiah S/o.Sri K.Balaiah, R/o.Q.No.213/C BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 9 Ch.Hopala Rao S/o.Sri Ch.Chandraiah, R/o.Q.No.1980, BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 10 L.L.Narasimha Rao S/o.L.Veerabhadra Rao, R/o.Q.No.2143/D, BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 11 K.Penchalaiah S/o.K.Narsimhulu, R/o.Q.No.4092,MIG BHEL Phase II Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 12 G.Venkateswarlu S/o.G.Laxmaiah, R/o.Q.No.3333, MIG BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 13 T.R.Prasad S/o.Sri.T.Sriramulu R/o.Q.No.633/C, BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 14 Mohd.Zameeruddin S/o.Sri Abdul Gani R/o.Q.No.479/A, BHEL Township Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad 15 Momula Pandari S/o.M.Buchchappa R/o.Q.No.1-3-136, Hanuman Nagar Sangareddy, Medak District 16 S.S.Narasappa S/o.Sri B.C.Vrukundappa R/o.H.No.210, Block No.C, Sai Krupa Apartments Madeenaguda, Hyderabad 17 P.Jayadev Reddy S/o.Not known to the plaintiff R/o.Plot No.301, Soundarya Residency Street No.8,Himayat nagar, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in conducting the auction sale on 9.5.2009 in respect of landed property admeasuring 2999.88 sq.yards owned by the petitioner in Sy.Nos.330 (P), 340(P) & 341 of Bachupally village as illegal, without jurisdiction contrary to law colourable exercise of power and in violation of Articles, 14,21 and 300A of Constitution of India consequently direct the 1st respondent to drop all the proceedings including conduct of auction sale forth with by setting aside the auction sale notice dated 8.4.2009 and grant such other relief as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B.VENKAT RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9863 of 2009 ORAL ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 1st respondent in conducting the auction sale on 9.5.2009 in respect of landed property admeasuring 2999.88 sq. yards owned by the petitioner in Sy.Nos.330 (P), 340 (P) and 341 of Bachupally Village, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the 1st respondent to drop all the proceedings including auction sale forthwith by setting aside the auction sale notice dated 8.4.2009. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: The petitioner is the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.5.20 guntas in Sy.Nos.330 (P), 340(P) and 341 (P) of Bachupally village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and converted into 76 plots along with other lands in the same survey number, on the basis of a common draft lay out obtained by his vendor from HUDA dated 10.11.1999 and subsequently, a final lay out dated 16.5.2006 was obtained from the HUDA consisting of 296 plots. While so, respondents 2 to 17 brought some documents into existence by impersonation and tried to interfere with the property of the petitioner and hence, she filed a suit in O.S.No.369 of 2007 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District against respondents 2 to 17, for declaration that the alleged sale deeds brought into existence by respondents 2 to 17 are null and void and not binding on the petitioner, and for perpetual injunction. The learned Judge granted status quo on 25.4.2007 in the interlocutory application. The petitioner also filed a private complaint against respondents 2 to 17 for the offence under Sections 416, 419, 420, 441, 463, 464 r/w 120 IPC. While so, the petitioner came to know that the 1st respondent issued an auction sale notice on 8.4.2009 purporting to conduct an auction of the said land on 9.5.2009 on the ground that respondents 2 to 17 were borrowers of the 1st respondent-Bank and that the said lands in Sy.Nos.330, 340 & 341 of Bachupally village were mortgaged with the Bank and on account of default, the property was put to auction. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the civil suit as well as the criminal proceedings are pending between the parties in respect of the land in question. The material on record goes to show that the learned Senior Civil Judge has granted status quo in respect of the land in question and the said order of status quo is in subsistence. At this juncture, if any interference is caused or if any proceedings, objectionable to either of the parties, are conducted in respect of the land in question, it is always open to such party to avail the remedies that are open under law. In these circumstances and in view of the pendency of the civil suit before the Court below and the subsistence of the order of status quo, We feel that the opinion expressed if any, at this stage of the proceedings, would touch the merits of the civil suit pending before the Court below. The present writ petition is devoid of merits and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari __________________________ Justice B. Chandra Kumar Date: 06.05.2009 Nn/gurc THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9863 of 2009 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 6th May, 2009