IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13180 of 2005 Between: Smt. Dommeti Nagaratnam & others. … Petitioners AND The Nallam Vari Satram Charitable Institution, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, rep., by its Founder Trustee & another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri C.C.S. Sastry Counsel for respondent No.2: AGP for Endowments This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13180 of 2005 ORDER:- At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in trying to evict the petitioners from their lands admeasuring Ac.3.39½ cents, Ac.3.41 cents, Ac.3.44½ cents and Ac.4.44 cents in various survey numbers as mentioned in auction notice dated 14.06.2005 of Anatavaram Village, Mummidivaram Mandal, East Godavari District, without recourse to the provisions of the A.P. (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners claimed to be the tenants of the abovementioned land belonging to respondent No.1 institution. Their grievance is that without evicting them, auction notice dated 14.06.2005 was issued proposing to auction the leasehold rights of the said properties. This Court, on 21.06.2005, granted interim direction. Therefore, the proposed auction would not have been held. The writ petition, to the extent of the grievance of the petitioners regarding proposed auction thus ceases to exist. As regards the plea of the petitioners that they cannot be dispossessed without following due process of law, namely, by issuing notice under Rule 5 of the Rules, the same looks to me to be legitimate. If the petitioners are tenants, consequent on the automatic termination of the tenancy under Section 82(1) of the Act, the competent authority is bound to issue notice under Rule 5 of the Rules. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners, without following the procedure contemplated in the Rules. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.16736 of 2005 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 04.07.2008 ES