IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO: 647 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 30.12.2003 in WP No. 22593 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Kosigi Yadaiah and another ..... APPELLANTS AND A.Salauddin and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This Writ Appeal is filed by the respondents 2 and 3 in W.P. No. 22593 of 2003 aggrieved by the order dated 30.12.2003 passed by a learned Single Judge allowing the same and setting aside the order dated 20.9.2003 passed in an application filed in the proceedings initiated under Sec. 40 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1950, by the second respondent herein in Proceedings B/11696/2003, certifying that the appellants herein are the successors of the protected tenant late Durgaiah in respect of land inSy.No. 109, 110 and 111 of Gaddiannaram village. The appellants herein have filed an application under Sec. 40 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1950 claiming that their father Durgaiah was a protected tenant in respect of land in Sy. Nos. 109 to 111 of Gaddiannaram village and after his death they have succeeded his father. They also filed an application therein for the grant of interim order. The writ petitioner i.e. the first respondent herein got impleaded before the second respondent as respondent No.8 therein. The seond respondent passed an order directing the parties to maintain status quo as on that day. Aggrieved thereby, the Writ Petition i.e. first respondent herein filed the writ petition. The learned Single Judge on extensive consideration of the contentions raised before him, observed that Section 40 of A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1950 (for brevity the Act) relates to certification of successors of a protected tenant and they would be entitled to the rights held by such protected tenant. It is further observed that having regard to the very nature of proceedings, the Act itself does not contemplate passing of an interim order, inasmuch as the proceeding under Sec. 40 are comparable to the original petitions filed before the Civil Court for grant of succession certificate. Observing so, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition setting aside the order impugned therein directing the second respondent herein to dispose of the proceedings under Sec. 40 of the Act as expeditiously as possible not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy thereof. Aggrieved thereby, the respondents 2 and 3 in the Writ Petition preferred this Writ Appeal. The order impugned herein is passed as long back as on 30.12.2003. The present Writ Appeal is listed on 25.03.2004. Admittedly, the order impugned herein is not stayed. Therefore, by afflux of time, as directed by the learned Single Judge, the proceedings initiated by the appellants herein under Sec. 40 of the Act, must have been disposed of by the second respondent herein. In the circumstances of the case, without adverting to the merits or otherwise of the contentions raised herein, we dispose of the Writ Appeal directing the second respondent herein to dispose of the application filed under Sec. 40 of the Act by the appellants herein without a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after affording opportunity to all the parties concerned, if not already disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari _________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar November 24, 2009 MAS.