IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO : 1629 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 28/11/2008 in WP NO : 26092 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Chapala Vasudeva Reddy S/o. Sing Reddy R/o. Thorrur Village, Thorrur Revenue Mandal, Warnagal District. 2 Chapala Poolamma W/o. Ramachandra Reddy R/o. Thorrur Village, Thorrur Revenue Mandal, Warnagal District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its District Collector, Warangal, Warangal District. 2 The Tahsildar, Mandal Revenue Office Thorrur Mandal, Thorrur , Warangal District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad, Warangal District. 4 The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records Warangal, Warangal District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants: MR.B.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL No.1629 of 2008 ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA) Heard both sides. 2. This Writ Appeal is filed assailing the order, dated 28.11.2008, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court, in Writ Petition No.26092 of 2008. 3. Appellants are the writ petitioners and respondents are the respondents in the said writ petition. 4. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment, the parties will be referred to as arrayed in the said writ petition. 5. The only grievance of the writ petitioners in this writ appeal is that the learned single Judge dismissed the said writ petition with certain observations. 6. For ready reference, the relevant portion of the impugned order is extracted hereunder: - “After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana Area), this Court is of the considered opinion that the writ petition as laid is not maintainable. The reasons are as follows: As per Rule 6(a)(1) of the Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977, of Andhra Pradesh High Court, a person filing a writ petition is required to file all the documents in support of the various allegations in the affidavit. Though petitioners allege that they purchased the property, no material is placed before this Court. Secondly entire allegations in the writ petition are against the supporters of M.R.P.S. and local MLA. There is not even an iota of evidence against Tahsildar alleging that Tahsildar is trying to dispossess the petitioners. In this background, this Court is not able to entertain the writ petition. If so aggrieved/advised, the petitioners may approach the District Collector for necessary redressal. This Court also observes that if petitioners are really owners, they cannot be deprived of their rights unless and until due process of law is followed. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.” (emphasis supplied by us) 7. However, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners expressed an apprehension that since the said writ petition was dismissed, despite the observations made therein, the respondent-authorities may act adverse to the interest of the writ petitioners. 8. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances, we feel it suffice to remove the apprehension by changing the language in the impugned order, slightly, as under: - 9. In place of “with the above observations”, the expression “subject to the above observations” may be used. 10. In view of the said modification, the last sentence of the impugned order reads as under: - “Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.” 11. All other observations and the reasoning given by the learned single Judge in the impugned order shall remain undisturbed. 12. With the above modification, the writ appeal is disposed of, at the stage of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH 12th December 2008 DR ... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its District Collector, Warangal, Warangal District. 2 The Tahsildar, Mandal Revenue Office Thorrur Mandal, Thorrur , Warangal District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad, Warangal District. 4 The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records Warangal, Warangal District. 5 2 CCS to Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 6 2CD copies