IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT APPEAL NO.1788 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 20.08.2008 in W.P.NO.4424 OF 2005 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Palaboina Muralidhar, s/o. Ramawamy, R/o. Narsampet, Warangal District. ...APPELLANT AND 1 Paspuleti Sripathi Rao, S/o. Krishnaiah, C/o. E. Jaga Rao, H.No. MIG No. 6/2 Housing Board Colony, Nakkalagutta, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. 2 The Regional Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, KUDA Complex, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. 3 The Grampanchayath, Narsampet, Warangal District, rep by its Executive Officer. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: G.ELISHA (SC FOR ZPPS AND MPPS, TEL REG) The Court delivered the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT APPEAL NO.1788 of 2008 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri A.Prabhakara Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri G.Elisha, learned Standing Counsel for Panchayat and Zilla Parishad, Sri P.Hari Sridhar, learned counsel and the learned Government Pleader for Town Planning for the other respondents. At their request, the appeal itself is taken up for disposal. The appellant is the third respondent in W.P.No.4424 of 2005, where he sought a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the relief of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the Final Lay-out in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.2.20 gts in Survey No.796/1 situated at Narsampet Village and Mandal, Warangal District as illegal. The main ground on which the Writ Petition rested was to the effect that even though the petitioner-first respondent applied for such Lay-out as long back as in the year 1994, yet the same could not be released on some or other grounds. Further, in spite of the fact that the second respondent suffered a decree in O.S.No.93 of 1994 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, which was renumbered as O.S.No.155 of 1996 by the Senior Civil Judge, Mahaboobabad, with a finding against him, the same has not been considered. After contest by the respondents herein, including the Gram Panchayat, the learned Single Judge directed the Gram Panchayat to release the Final Lay- out. Hence, the appeal by the contesting respondent in the Writ Petition, who is also the third party. After hearing the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that admittedly, no appeal has been preferred against the said judgment either by the State or even by the Gram Panchayat or by the third party. In spite of the fact that while allowing the Writ Petition, the learned Single Judge imposed heavy costs of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) to be paid to the writ petitioner, namely, the first respondent herein, having regard to the finding arrived at by the learned Single Judge, especially placing reliance on the observations in the Civil proceedings and the findings therein, it is felt that there is no justification for the Gram Panchayat to sit over the said application and not considering the Final Lay-out. In view of the said finding, which is purely on fact and since the decree has become final, we do not find any justification on behalf of the appellant herein as he does not have any locus or public interest as such, especially in the absence of any such cause by the Endowment Department or the Temple authorities or by the Gram Panchayat itself. Hence, there are no merits in the appeal. The Writ Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) ___________________ (G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J) 12th March 2009 RRB