THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.23010 OF 2010 DATED 7TH DECEMBER, 2011 BETWEEN Mr.Tamma Ammi Reddy and others. …Petitioners And State Bank of Hyderabad, Rep. by its Branch Manager, Chilakaluripet Branch, Chilakaluripet, Guntur District and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.23010 OF 2010 ORDER: This writ petition was ﬁled by 28 persons claiming to be agriculturists of Jagarlamudi Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District, assailing the action of the State Bank of Hyderabad in trying to sell their stocks of agricultural produce stored in the godowns of the Central Warehousing Corporation, Chilakaluripet Mandal, Guntur District, the third respondent. According to them, the sale of the stocks was proposed to be held on 16.09.2010. This Court, by order dated 15.09.2010, permitted the State Bank of Hyderabad to proceed with the auction but directed it not to ﬁnalize the same until further orders subject to the condition that the petitioners pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- each to the credit of their respective loan accounts with the Bank on or before 21.09.2010. On 24.11.2010, this Court passed another order to the eﬀect that the respondent Bank should not ﬁnalize the auction of the agricultural produce of the petitioners which was warehoused with the third respondent subject to the condition that the petitioners individually pay two instalments of Rs.20,000/- each on or before 31.12.2010 and 31.01.2011 and the balance of the outstanding loan amounts before the end of April, 2011. Sri Sricharan Telaprolu, learned counsel for the petitioners, states that his clients failed to comply with the aforestated conditional order dated 24.11.2010 and that the respondent Bank proceeded with the sale of their stocks even before April, 2011 without giving due notice to them. Sri G.Ramachandra Rao, learned counsel for the third respondent, however states that he has received instructions under letter dated 22.09.2011 to the eﬀect that the stocks of agricultural produce were returned to the petitioners. These disputed questions of fact need not trouble this Court at this stage as Sri Sricharan Telaprolu, learned counsel for the petitioners, himself states that the grievance put forth by the petitioners in this writ petition no longer exists owing to the subsequent events. Recording the said submission, the writ petition is closed. Needless to state, it shall be open to the petitioners to initiate such other remedies as are available to them in law for redressal of their grievance, if any, with regard to the subject matter of this writ petition. No order as to costs. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 7TH DECEMBER, 2011. VGSR/PGS