HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICES ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA W.A.M.P.NO.1636/2010 and WA NO.189/2002 DT. 8-11-2010 WAMP No.1636/2010: State Bank of India, Hyderabad Circle Supervising Staff Co-operative Building Society Ltd.,, Hyderabad represented by its Secretary …Petitioner V. 1. The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad represented by its Commissioner and Special Officer, Hyderabad and others. ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA W.A.M.P.NO.1636/2010 and WA NO.189/2002 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) WAMP No.1636/2010 is filed to set-aside the order passed by this court dt. 3-6-2009 dismissing WA No.189/2002 for non- prosecution. Heard the leaned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondents. WAMP No.1636/2010 is allowed and WA No.189/2002 is restored to its original file. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein will be hereinafter referred to as arrayed in the writ petition. This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dt. 28-1-2002 dismissing the WP No.26636/2001 filed by the writ petitioner for declaration that the action of the respondents 1 and 2, namely, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, represented by its Commissioner & Special Officer, Hyderabad and Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Circle No.1, Town Planning Department, Hyderabad, represented by its Assistant Town Planner respectively, in not initiating any action on the application submitted by the writ petitioner and permitting the third respondent to proceed with the construction activity without considering the objections raised by the writ petitioner-society as arbitrary and illegal. Earlier to the present writ petition, the writ petitioner-society filed WP No. 4876/2001 seeking a direction to the respondents therein (including the person-in-charge of the petitioner-society) not to alienate any properties of the society to third parties and the same has been disposed of at the admission stage on 20-3-2001 directing the petitioner to approach the competent authority under A.P. Co-operative Societies Act to resolve the dispute through arbitration. Since the arbitration proceedings are pending to resolve the dispute between the petitioner-society and the third respondent, a learned single Judge by the impugned order dismissed the writ petition by making it clear that any construction made by the third respondent in the site in question shall be subject to the result of the award that may be passed by the Arbitrator in the arbitration proceedings initiated under the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act. Admittedly, there is a dispute between the writ petitioner- society and the third respondent, with regard to allotment of plot to the third respondent, who claims to be a member of the society and who is constructing a building after obtaining necessary permission from the MCH authorities, and arbitration proceedings are pending to resolve the said dispute. In that view of the matter, the learned single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition holding that said construction shall always be subject to the result of the arbitration proceedings that may be passed by the Arbitrator. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned single warranting interference. The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J ___________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA,J Date: 8-11-2010 kmr