IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT APPEAL NO : 819 of 2007 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 03/04/2007 in WP NO : 6656 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Syed Raheemuddin, S/o. Sherfuddin, Muslim, R/o. 17-4-508, Yakutpura, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad./ 2 The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad. 3 Sri Syed Osman, S/o. Syed Azizuddin, R/o. 4-149, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant:MR.SRINIVAS EMANI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per TGK,J) Apparently there are no bonafides and we see no error in the judgment rendered by the learned single Judge. In fact, in the order dated 20-9-2005 passed by the Joint Collector, he has extracted the dates of adjournment and the appearance of the parties. It is clear that the appellant was absent throughout and hence the authority as well as the learned single Judge have justified in negativing the contentions of the appellant. However, as the counsel for the appellant submitted that if the appellant is given a change he would demonstrate his case before the authority, we deem it appropriate to give one more opportunity so that he can ventilate his grievance before the authority. Further the lis between the parties shall normally be decided on merits rather than on technicalities. Despite the fact that a notice to the 3rd respondent is sent and received, he has not chosen to appear either in person or through any Advocate. In that view of the matter, we are of the view that the appellant be given one more opportunity on his depositing an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousands) towards costs with the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District within a period of four weeks from today and the said amount shall be given to the 3rd respondent. On asserting the fact that the costs are deposited, he may re-hear the matter and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. For any reason, if the appellant does not cooperate, it is always open for the authorities i.e., the Joint Collector to dismiss the appeal. With the observations as above, the writ appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Note: Issue copy in one week. /B.O/ GRR To 1. 2.2 CD copies