THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU and THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dated: 23-12-2010 WRIT PETITION Nos. 23552 AND 23806 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION No. 23552 OF 2007 Between: Chandramohan Agarwal and three others ... PETITIONERS AND The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA), Paigah Palace, Rasoolpura, Police Lines, Secunderabad, rep., by its Vice Chairman and six others …RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION No. 23806 OF 2007 Between: Kanuri Family Trust ... PETITIONER AND The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA), Paigah Palace, Rasoolpura, Police Lines, Secunderabad, rep., by its Vice Chairman and six others …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU and THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION Nos. 23552 AND 23806 OF 2007 COMMON ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Shri Nisar Ahmad Kakru) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at length. To appreciate the cause because of which these petitions were entertained by the learned single Judge, apposite it is to extract the orders dated 6-11-2007 and 07-11-2007 in their entirety, contents whereof being quite similar, therefore, we reproduce only order dated 06-11-2007: “Ordinarily, when an application for restoration of a writ petition, dismissed for default, is filed and pending, this Court would not entertain a fresh writ petition, but in view of the circumstances explained in getting the restoration petition disposed of, I deem it appropriate to entertain this writ petition. Notice to the respondents. Pending further orders, the parties shall maintain status quo obtaining as on today regarding possession. Post on 12-11-2007.” A bare perusal of the order would unveil the reservation of the learned single Judge in entertaining the writ petitions. Ultimately, what has prevailed on him is the pendency of the applications seeking restoration of the writ petitions which was likely to take time for disposal. Whether these petitions could have been entertained on such cause, we refrain from expression of opinion having become academic, reason being that the original Writ Petition Nos.26418 of 2006 and 3007 of 2007 stand already restored to their original numbers. In that view of the matter, both these petitions are dismissed along with miscellaneous petitions being not maintainable. Interim direction, if any, shall also stand vacated. VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J NISAR AHMAD KAKRU, CJ 23-12-2010 K. Shyleshi