THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No :22761 of 2007 DATED:29-10-2007 BETWEEN: P.Ananthamma & 3 others. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Tahsildar (Mandal Revenue Officer), Tandur, Ranrareddy District & 3 others. .....RESPONDENTS ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 2. Petitioners seek a writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the 1st respondent in not disposing of the injunction petition pending disposal of the application under Section 32 of the A.P.(Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 ( for brevity, ‘the Act’) as illegal, arbitrary, and consequently restrain the 2nd respondent not to entertain or register plots or land in Sy.No.75 or (75/AB) measuring Ac.5.29 guntas situated at Saipur village, Tandur mandal, Rangareddy District to be executed and presented by the respondents 3 and 4 herein in faovur of the third parties till the disposal of the said application. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that their father-late Ashappa, resident of Saipur village, Tandur mandal was a protected tenant of an extent of Ac.5.29 guntas agricultural dry land in Sy.No.75 situated at Saipur village, Tandur mandal, Rangareddy District and the landlord is one Sale Ananthaiah. The protected tenant alone was in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the said property and after the death of their father petitioners being the legal heirs are entitled to succeed the protected tenancy under the Act. It is stated that their father died in 1991 and immediately the protected tenants were dispossessed by the respondents 3 and 4 who have purchased the said land from the landlord in 1991. 4. It is the further case of the petitioner that the very sale of the said land by the original landlord in favour of the respondents 3 and 4 is illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Act. It is stated that they have made an application for restoration of possession under Section 32(1) of the Act and as the said purchasers are alienating the land they have also filed an application for injunction under Section 32(1) r/w Section 36 of the Act on 25-06-2006 and thereafter filed an application to grant injunction on 11-05-2007 but the 1st respondent-Tahsildar, Tandur has not passed any orders. The only grievance of the petitioners is that there is no justification on the part of the 1st respondent in not disposing of the injunction application pending under Section 32 of the Act and the petitioners seek a direction, directing the 2nd respondent not to entertain any deeds alienating the said property to be executed by the respondents 3 and 4. 5. Even according to the petitioners they were dispossessed in 1991 and they have filed application under Section 32 of the Act only on 25-06-2006. I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the merits of the case or with regard to any of the contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as the application under Section 32 of the Act is pending before the 1st respondent. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the injunction application at the earliest point of time and then the main application also as expeditiously as possible without any unnecessary delay after giving reasonable opportunity to the concerned. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J 29th October, 2007. Note: Furnish C.C. of the order within two days. B/o Tsy