IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 8720 of 2009 Between: T.Madhava Reddy S/o.T.Narsa REddy R/o.Badangpet village Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of AP., rep.by its Principal Secretary Department of Revenue ,Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad 2 The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapul, Hyderabad 3 The Deputy Collector and Tahsildar, Balanagar Mandal Ranga Reddy District 4 The Tahsildar,Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 5 The Deputy Collector and Tahsildar Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 6 The Tahsildar, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal Ranga Reddy District 7 The Tahsildar, Keesara mandal Ranga Reddy District 8 The Tahsildar, Kandukuru Mandal Ranga Reddy District 9 The Tahsildar, Maheswaram Mandal Ranga Reddy District 10 The Deputy Collector and Tahsildar Qutbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 11 The Deputy Collector and Tahsildar,Saroornagar Mandal Ranga Reddy District 12 The Tahsildar,Shamshabad Mandal Ranga Reddy District 13 The Tahsildar,Shankarpally Mandal Ranga Reddy District 14 The Tahsildar,Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring as follows: a. that the circular Lr.No.F2/3012/2005 dated 3.1.2006 on the file of the 2nd respondent viz., the Joint Collector, R.R.District is null and void and opposed to the letter and spirit of the AP (TA) Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1950 b. that the order of the learned single Judge in WP.No.20360/2005 dated 15.9.2005 is violative of the statute and violative of the law settled in Manmohan and others Vs. Mohd.Moinuddin Ali Khan (Dead) by LRs reported in 2008 (8) SCALE at page 487 para 7,Sanjay Singh & Others Vs. Uttar Pradesh public Service Commission reported in (2007) 3 SCC 720 held at para 19(g) and State of Mysore and others Vs. M.L.Nagade and Gadag and others reported in (1983) 3 SCC 253: c. that the Tenancy Tribunal constituted under the AP (TA) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 or Act has the exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate the claims of the Protected Tenants including that of deciding the legal heirship Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.TULASI DAS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) The circular which has been challenged in this petition has been issued in view of the directions given by this Court in Writ Petition No. 20360 of 2005. In the circumstances, the learned advocate for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition so as to question the validity of the order made in the aforestated writ petition. Permission is granted. The petition stands disposed of as withdrawn with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 27th April, 2009 ks