IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION Nos:19055 and 19081 of 2008 WRIT PETITION NO : 19081 of 2008: Between: 1.V. Buchi Reddy, S/o. Sathi Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 2.M. Aravind Reddy, S/o. Gopal Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 3.M. Kushalav, S/o. Gopal, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4.B. Ramesh, S/o. Anjaiah, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 5.P. Laxminarsimha Reddy, S/o. Narasimha Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 6.Vidyasagar Reddy, S/o. Narayana Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 7.Smt. M. Taramma, W/o. Gopal Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 8.P. Yasashkar Reddy, S/o. Janardhan Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 9.M. Gopal Reddy, S/o. Pulla Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 10.J. Sripada, W/o. Jagan Mohan Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 11.M. Vishnu, S/o. Narasimha, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 12.P. Prharshini, W/o. Yasashkar Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 13.J. Havishadwaj Reddy, S/o. Srinivas Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 14.Smt. Suguna, W/o. Buchi Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 15.Smt. J. Sowmya, W/o. Srinivas, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 16.V. Sadguna, W/o. Satyanarayana Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 17.J. Srinivas, S/o. Jaganmohan Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 18.M. Narasimha Reddy, S/o. Pulla Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 19.J. Vani Prasamha Reddy, W/o. Narasimha Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 20.P. Swapan, W/o. jagan Mohan Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 21.J. Narasimha Reddy, S/o. Jaganmohan Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 22.P. Janardhan Reddy, S/o. Abba Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 23.B. Subhasini. W/o. Roshi Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 24.P. Saroja, Wo. Janardhan Reddy R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 25.V. Satyanarayana Reddy, S/o. Buchi Reddy, R/o. Izzat Nagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Commissioner, HUDA, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents without disposing our applications ﬁled in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 166, dated 16-02-2008 as illegal, arbitration and violation of principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.KILARUKHADER BABA Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.KALPANA EKBOTE WRIT PETITION NO : 19081 of 2008: Between: P.Janardhan Reddy, S/o. Abbareddy, R/o. Sy.No.64,Madhapur, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, HUDA, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents without disposing the petition application dated 3-7-2008 and 23-9- 2008 ﬁled in terms of G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.02.2008 as illegal, arbitration and violation of principles of Natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.KILARUKHADER BABA Counsel for the Respondents: (SC FOR MCH CIRCLES 3&5) KALPANA EKBOTE The Court made the following COMMON ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition Nos.19055 and 19081 of 2008 Common Order: These two writ petitions are ﬁled by the petitioners stating that they are landless poor and they occupied Government land long back and constructed houses therein. Therefore, they submitted applications to the third respondent as per G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.02.2008, for transfer of rights over the said lands in their favour, and the same are pending consideration. The grievance of the petitioners is that without issuing any notice or initiating any proceedings under any statute, the subordinates of the ﬁrst respondent are trying to demolish the structures raised by them in the said lands, even during the pendency of their applications. Hence, these writ petitions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 3, and Smt.Kalpana Ekbote, learned Standing Counsel for HUDA, appearing for the ﬁrst respondent, and at their consent, both the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submits that the time limit fixed for submitting the applications under G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.02.2008, is extended upto 30.09.2008, and even before expiry of the said period, the petitioners have approached this Court. Admittedly, the time ﬁxed for submitting applications under G.O.Ms.No.166, which was issued on 16.02.2008 for regularization of the illegal encroachments made in Government lands, was extended upto 30.09.2008. Even before expiry of the said time, the petitioners approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of their applications. It is too premature to come to a conclusion that the respondents are not going to consider the request of the petitioners. As on today, there is no cause of action to give any direction to the respondents or to entertain these writ petitions. These writ petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. However, in case the applications of the petitioners are rejected, the petitioners are entitled to question the same in appropriate proceedings. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 04.09.2008 VGB/VV