IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 802 of 2008 Between: V.Vanaparthy Cheralu, S/o.Late Komaraiah, R/o.22-5-89, Perikawada,Deshaipet,Warangal ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Land Reforms and Urban Land Ceiling,Hyderabad 2 The Dist Collector, Warangal 3 The Rural Development Officer, Warangal 4 The Tahsildar, Warangal 5 The Special Officer-Cum-Competent Authority Urban Land Ceiling,Warangal 6 Dubba Venkata Papayya, S/o.Chenna Kesavulu, R/o.22-2-57,Ambedkar Street, Desaipet,Warangal .....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 to issue a writ,order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus,directing the respondents not to assign in or way dispose of Ac.4.00 of land in Sy.306, Desaipet,Warangal,by treating the same as surplus land under the Urban Land(Ceiling & Registation)Act 1976 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 802 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents not to assign the land admeasuring Ac.4.00 in survey No. 306, Desaipet, Warangal by treating the same as surplus land under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976. The petitioner claims that out of the total extent of Ac.8.00 in survey No. 306, Desaipet, Warangal, he owns land to an extent of Ac.4.00, having acquired the same under mortgage/conditional sale deed in the year 1971. He alleges that the sixth respondent herein filed a declaration under Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short the Act) wherein it was held that he holds land in excess of the ceiling limit by 97,994 sq meters and in the final settlement, the subject land belonging to the petitioner was shown as that of sixth respondent. The petitioner also filed declaration under section 6 of the Act on 4.12.1980 and alleges that without conducting proper enquiry, orders were passed by the Special Officer (Competent Authority) Urban Land Ceiling, Warangal dated 19.3.1978. Against the said orders, petitioner filed an appeal under section 33 of the Act before the Commissioner of Land Reforms and Urban Land Ceiling/first respondent and the same was disposed by orders dated 29.6.2004 remanding the matter to the Special Officer-5th respondent. Thereupon, on reconsideration of the matter orders dated 14.11.2005 were passed holding that the petitioner holds land in excess of ceiling limit to an extent of 21,123 sq mtrs. The petitioner disputes the same and contends that his land admeasuring Ac.4.00 was included in the holdings of sixth respondent. It is also stated in the affidavit that the 6th respondent filed a suit in O.S No. 1031 of 2001 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal against the petitioner, seeking recovery of possession and the same was dismissed by orders dated 6.10.2005, against which an appeal in A.S No. 112 of 2005 was filed on the file of the II Additional district Judge, Warangal, which was dismissed by orders dated 19.9.2007 for default. Thus, the petitioner claims that 6th respondent has no manner of right to claim the subject property or include the same in his holdings. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are trying to assign his land to land less poor, treating it as excess over his ceiling limit. Hence, the present writ petition. A counter affidavit is filed denying the averments made in the writ petition and inter alia contending that the petitioner is provided with a remedy of appeal under the Act and without availing the same has rushed to this Court and the writ petition is not maintainable. Today when the matter is taken up, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that pursuant to filing the present writ petition, against the orders dated 14.11.2005, the petitioner has preferred an appeal on 1.3.2008 and the same is pending. At this stage, both learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue agreed for disposal of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents for expeditious disposal of the appeal. Since a statutory appeal under Section 33 of the Act is pending consideration before the first respondent, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the first respondent to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner on 1.3.2008 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, expeditiously. Till such time, respondents are directed not to alienate the subject lands. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ____________ N.V.RAMANA,J DATE: 16.4.2008 TVK ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 802 of 2008 Date: 16.4.2008