IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 590 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 05/02/2009 in WP NO : 2525 OF 2005 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Farhad Gew Irani, S/o. Gew Shapurji Irani, R/o. 1-3-68, Main Road, Kazipet, Warangal District. 2 Shapur Gew Irani, S/o. Gew Shapurji Irani, R/o. 1-3-68, Main Road, Kazipet, Warangal District. 3 Rustum Gew Irani, S/o. Gew Shapurji Irani, R/o. 1-3-68, Main Road, Kazipet, Warangal District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1 The District Collector, Warangal District, Warangal. 2 The Superintendent of Police, Warangal District, Warangal. 3 The Station House Officer, Kazipet Police Station, Kazipet, Warangal District. 4 Pasunuri Manohar S/o. Narsaiah President of Kazipet Weaker Section Society Y.S.R. Nagar, Kazipet, Warangal District .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant:MR.J.VENKATESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO :590 of 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge, dated 5.2.2009 in Writ Petition No. 2525 of 2005 whereby and whereunder the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants seeking police aid. The facts in brief are that the appellants, who are the petitioners earlier filed Writ Petition No. 9761 of 1995 challenging the proceedings dated 16.1.1995 of the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Warangal declaring that the appellants are holders of excess urban land of an extent of 58,154 Sq. Meters, as confirmed by the 1st respondent on 22.4.1995 in the appeal preferred by the appellants. However, when the writ petition was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellants represented before the learned single Judge that in view of the repeal of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and as the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the repealed Act have not proceeded beyond the stage of Section 8(4) of the Act, the property of the appellants is beyond the regulatory ambit of the provisions of the Act, they were no longer aggrieved by the order of the Competent Authority or the Commissioner of Land Reforms & Urban Land Ceiling. The learned single Judge while recording the submission of the learned counsel, dismissed the said writ petition as not pressed. Aggrieved, the appellants filed the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the appellants are owners and possessors of the land in question and as such they are entitled for police protection in the event of illegal interference by anti social elements. In view of the fact that the matter arises under the Land Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 and in view of the fact that the substantive writ petition filed by the appellants under the said Act has been dismissed as not pressed, the learned single Judge was justified in dismissing the present writ petition seeking police aid also, through the order impugned in this appeal. In the circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge. However, liberty is reserved to the appellants to avail the remedies as are open to them under law. The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ___________________ T.MEENA KUMARI,J Date: 15th June, 2009 _________________ SANJAY KUMAR,J pnb