IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO.23 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 10-12-2008 in WVMP No.779 of 2008 in WPMP No.34745 of 2006 in WP No.27036 of 2006 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Boda @ Neeradi Narasinga Rao, s/o Balaiah, 50 yrs, R/o. Aminpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. 2 Boda @ Neeradi Balaram, s/o Laxmaiah, 62 yrs, R/o Aminpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. 3 Y.Pandu Raju, s/o Narsimham, 32 yrs, R/o. Aminpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. 4 K.Mallesh, s/o Babaiah, 37 yrs, R/o. Aminpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. 5 T.Panduranga Reddy, s/o T.Gopal Reddy, 40 yrs, R/o. Aminpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. 6 Y.Harinath, s/o Yellaiah, 40 yrs, r/o Aminpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. 7 B.Balraj S/o Sathaiah, 39 yrs, r/o Narregudem Hamlet of Aminpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. Appellants 3 to 7 are reptd. by their G.P.A. Holder Md.Abdul Sathar Khan S/o Mohd. Abdul Jabbar Khan, aged about 49 years r/o 5-6-65, Nalsabgadda, Sangareddy, Medak District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1 Joint Collector, Medak District at Sangareddy. 2 Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy, Medak District. 3 Mandal Revenue Officer, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. 4 Komara Balaiah, s/o Pentaiah, aged major, r/o Aminpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District. 5 V.Madhavi, w/o V.Satyanarayana, aged major, r/o 101, Aditya Enclave, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants: MR.V.Venkataramana Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP for Revenue for R.1 to R.3. Mr.M.V.Durga Prasad for R.5 The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per T.Meena Kumari,J) This Writ Appeal is filed against the order dated 10-12-2008 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in WVMP No.779 of 2008 and WPMP No.34745 of 2006 in Writ Petition No.27036 of 2006, whereby interim order dated 28-12-2006 passed in WPMP No.34744 of 2006 was vacated. Heard Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned counsel for the appellants; Sri M.V.Durga Prasad, learned counsel for respondent No.5; and perused the material on record. Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned counsel for the appellants, contended that the appellants are in physical possession and enjoyment of the land in question; and that if the interim order, which is in subsistence for nearly two years, is vacated, the appellants would suffer irreparable loss. The learned counsel further contended that against the order passed in CMA No.24 of 2006 on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Medak, the appellants filed a Civil Revision Petition before this Court and pending disposal of the said revision, status quo order was passed on 2-4-2008, which is still in force. Sri M.V.Durga Prasad, learned counsel for respondent No.5 supported the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge. Writ Petition No.27036 of 2006 is filed assailing order dated 30-11-2006 passed by respondent No.1, whereby ORC No.B4/Inam/348/97 dated 23-6-1997 issued by respondent No.2 in favour of petitioners 1 and 2 was cancelled on the ground that it is not bona fide. On 28-12-2006, this Court, while admitting the Writ Petition, suspended the operation of the said order in WPMP No.34745 of 2006. The learned single Judge, while vacating the said interim order observed thus: “Fifth respondent in her counter-affidavit accompanying application for vacating interim order sustains the impugned order contending that ORC obtained by petitioners 1 and 2 is not bona fide, as there was no such file available in the office of Revenue Divisional Officer. Learned counsel for petitioners 1 and 2 contends that when such was the case, appellate authority ought to have remanded the matter to original authority. This Court however is not able to countenance any such submission. It appears, there was a suit filed by the petitioners 3 to 7 being O.S.No.294 of 2005 on the file of the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy, for permanent injunction. Temporary injunction was granted in I.A.No.698 of 2005. Aggrieved by which, fifth respondent herein filed CMA No.24 of 2006 on the file of the Court of V Additional District Judge, Medak, which was allowed on 06-11-2006 vacating temporary injunction. Civil Revision Petition preferred by petitioners 3 to 7 against the orders of CMA was rejected. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to allow order of interim suspension especially when competent civil court found that petitioners 3 to 7, who are subsequent purchasers from petitioners 1 and 2, are not in possession”. Since the interim order dated 28-12-2006 passed in WPMP No.34745 of 2006 was in subsistence for nearly two years and the Civil Revision Petition, in which status quo is directed to be maintained, is still pending, the balance of convenience is in favour of continuing the interim order for a period of two months and the Writ Petition is finally heard and disposed of in the meanwhile. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge is aside and the interim order dated 28-12-2006 passed in WPMP No.34745 of 2006 shall be continued for a period of two months. Registry is directed to post the main Writ Petition for final hearing before the appropriate Court on 26-2-2009. The Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed of. --------------------------------- T. MEENA KUMARI, J. ___________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J. Dt.21–01-2009. MNR