THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO.483 OF 1999 Dt.12.8.2009 Between: The Special Officer and Competent Authority Urban Land Ceiling, Vijayawada … Appellant And Dr. Pinnamaneni Kasturi and others … Respondents WRIT PETITION NO.21577 OF 2000 Between: Vennam Adinarayana and others … Petitioners And Government of A.P., rep. by its Secretary Revenue (UC-I) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents WRIT PETITION NO.9128 OF 2003 Between: Chilukuri Dhanalakshmi … Petitioner And Government of A.P., rep. by its Secretary Revenue (UC-I) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents WRIT PETITION NO.19632 OF 2003 Between: Potluri Usha Rani … Petitioner And Government of A.P., rep. by its Secretary Revenue (UC-I) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO.483 OF 1999, WRIT PETITION NO.21577 OF 2000; 9128 AND 19632 OF 2003 COMMON ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy) Since these cases raise common issues, they are heard and being disposed of together. Writ Appeal No.483 of 1999 has been filed questioning order dt.3.12.1998 in Writ Petition No.33623 of 1998. Writ Petition Nos.21577 of 2000 and 9128 and 19632 of 2003 have been filed questioning order dt.2.6.1999 passed by the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Vijayawada, whereby respondents 1 to 3 in Writ Appeal No.483 of 1999 were declared as not holding surplus land under the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, “the Act”). In view of the events that have subsequently transpired, it is not necessary for this Court to delve into the facts in detail. It would suffice to note that in pursuance of the directions given by this Court while disposing of Writ Petition No.33623 of 1998, directing the appellant to consider the representation filed by respondents 1 to 3, in the Writ Appeal, the appellant in Writ Appeal No. 483 of 1999 has passed a revised order under Section 8(4) of the Act holding that respondents 1 to 3 do not hold surplus land. The writ petitioners in W.P. No.21577 of 2000 and batch are members of the cooperative society, which claims to have entered into an agreement with respondents 1 to 3 for sale of the land in dispute and have jointly applied for exemption from the provisions of the Act in pursuance of G.O. Ms.No.136, dt.28.1.1981. They felt aggrieved by order dt.2.6.1999 passed under Section 8(4) of the Act in favour of the respondents 1 to 3 in the Writ Appeal. At the hearing, it is conceded that with the repeal of the provisions of the Act with effect from 28.3.2008, the parties have to work out their remedies in the appropriate Civil Court, because their very claim for exemption from the provisions of the Act becomes redundant with the repeal of the Act. As far as the Writ Appeal is concerned, as the appellant himself has passed the revised order under Section 8(4) of the Act, he can have no grievance against the final order passed in Writ Petition No.33623 of 1998. In this view of the matter, the Writ Appeal and all the Writ Petitions have become infructuous and they are accordingly dismissed. The writ petitioners are left free to workout their remedies in appropriate Civil Court. ______________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ______________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 12.08.2009 ks/bnr