THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITIONS No. 31243 and 31244 of 2010, 3711, 3712, 3714 and 3715 of 2011 COMMON ORDER: This batch of Writ Petitions is ﬁled questioning the similar but separate destraint orders issued by Respondent No. 2 for recovery of certain arrears under the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Recovery Act, 1864. Even though Sri T. Balaswamy, learned counsel for the petitioners has raised several contentions, it is not necessary for this Court to deal with the same in view of the admitted fact that identical destraint orders were subject matter of Writ Petition No. 11212 of 2005 ﬁled by the petitioners in these Writ Petitions. A learned Single Judge of this Court has considered the validity of those destraint orders and dismissed the Writ Petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that while dismissing the Writ Petition, the learned Single Judge has not considered various aspects. I am afraid, the petitioners cannot initiate fresh round of litigation when they have suﬀered the ﬁnal order in the earlier round of litigation. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that against the order dated 03.11.2008 in Writ Petition No. 11212 of 2005, the petitioners have ﬁled a Writ Appeal and that the same is pending. Learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise submitted that the said Writ Appeal has been ﬁled with a delay of 705 days and that notice on the application for condonation of delay was ordered. In my opinion, the petitioners are entitled to urge all the contentions, which they have raised in the present Writ Petitions, in the pending Writ Appeal. They cannot therefore, be permitted to ﬁle a fresh set of Writ Petitions. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petitions are dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to pursue the pending Writ Appeal. No costs. ----------------------------------------- (C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 5th December 2011 ksld