THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Writ Petition No. 15032 of 1994 Order: This writ petition is filed seeking to have the order of the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, dated 03.01.1994, confirming the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 22.03.1979, quashed on the ground that the land in question is wakf land and a service inam and that the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955, has no application to such lands. During the pendency of this writ petition the Joint Collector, in an appeal filed by third parties, by his order dated 22.11.2006 set aside the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 22.03.1979. The Joint Collector, in his order dated 22.11.2006, observed that the lands were wakf lands and grant of occupancy rights certificate to individuals in respect of wakf lands was not in order, that no individual was entitled to get any occupancy rights certificate on such lands and that religious institutions were alone entitled for being granted occupancy rights certificate. The Joint Collector directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to issue occupancy rights certificate in the name of religious institutions only in the light of the amended Act No.19 of 1994, after disposal of the writ petition pending before this Court (the present writ petition). Aggrieved by the said order of the Joint Collector, W.P. No. 10204 of 2007 was filed and the said writ petition is said to be pending on the file of this Court. From the aforesaid facts, it is evident that the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 22.03.1979, which is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition has itself been set aside by the Joint Collector, in his order dated 22.11.2006 and, as such, the present writ petition has become infructuous. Since the petitioners herein are admittedly arrayed as respondents in W.P. No.10204 of 2007, the cause in the present writ petition does not necessitate adjudication. While Sri A. Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, would request this Court to hear both the writ petitions together, I see no justification in doing so, as the order under challenge in this writ petition no longer survives and the petitioners herein are, in any event, arrayed as respondents in the other writ petition. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. __________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. Date: 03.03.2009 Nsr