THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.23673 of 2011 Dated 23rd August, 2011 Between: D.Chandrasekhar Reddy and another …Petitioners And The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad and another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Eranki Phani Kumar Counsel for respondents: Dr.Y.Padmavathi The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “…to issue a Writ or Order or Direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in attempting to dispossess the petitioners from their lands in Survey No.1007/a of Kaitalapur Revenue Village, Kukatpally, Balanagar Mandal of Rangareddy District without following due process of law pursuant to the impugned letter dated 04/05.08.2011 in Lr.No.A/1013/TPS/HO/GHMC/2009/2464 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, with a consequential direction to the respondents not to demarcate any land owned by the petitioners in Survey No.1007/a of Kaitalapur Revenue Village, Kukatpally, Balanagar Mandal, Rangareddy District for the purpose of laying any road by way of demarcation or otherwise in the interest of justice.” At the hearing, Sri Eranki Phani Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the impugned action of the respondents is in violation of the interim order passed by this Court in W.P.No.7430 of 2010. In my opinion, the petitioners having already filed the said writ petition questioning the interference by the respondents, they cannot be permitted to initiate another round of litigation by way of a separate writ petition, as that would amount to permitting multiplicity of proceedings. As on the petitioners’ own showing the impugned action is alleged to be in violation of the interim order already passed by this Court, they are left with an efficacious remedy of seeking enforcement of the interim order by initiating appropriate proceedings. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners as indicated above. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.29011 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 23rd August, 2011 VGB