IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 4885 of 2009 Between: Ch.Bhupal goud, S/o. Late Ayodhya, R/o.Flat No.302, Odean Enclave, Domalguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The REgistrar, Special Court Under AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition ) Act at B.R.K.R. Building, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 State of A.P. Rep by RDO, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 3 Smt. K.Venkata Subbayamma, W/o. Purnaiah, R/o. H.No.3-4-308/9/A Parwarish Bagh, Hyderabad. 4 K.Vijaya Kumar, S/o. Late Purnaiah, R/o. H.No.3-4-308/9/A Parwarish Bagh, Hyderabad. 5 Andhra Bank, Visakhapatnam Branch Rep by its Manager. 6 K.Venkateshwara Rao, S/o. K.Ugandhar Rao, R/o. A-2, T.I.E.Blanagar, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to pass appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the special Court under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad in dismissing the 1A 1444 of 2008 in LGC 27 of 1991 by its order dated 23/12/2008 by eschewing the evidence of RW-1 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently allow the same by setting - aside the above orders and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.GOPAL GOVIND NAIK Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Sri Justice GHULAM MOHAMMED) This Writ Petition has been filed seeking Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad in dismissing the I.A.No. 1444 of 2008 in LGC No. 27 of 1991 by its order dated 23.12.2008 by eschewing the evidence of RW-1 as illegal and consequently to allow the same by setting aside the orders. Second respondent has filed the above said LGC alleging that the petitioner has forcibly grabbed the Government land in Shakepet Village bearing T.S.No. 28 and 29 part comprising of 44,800 sq.mts. In that LGC, an application I.A.No. 1444 of 2008 was filed by the petitioner herein under Section 151 CPC to set aside the order dated 25.11.2008 and recall RW-1 for the purpose of marking documents. The reasons assigned in the affidavit are that on 19.11.2008 due to ill health the petitioner could not appear before the Court and on 24.11.2008 his counsel assisted the section staff in tracing out the documents and after tracing out the documents his counsel appeared before the Court on 25.11.2008. By that time, the learned Judge passed an order on 25.11.2008 stating that the petitioner has not produced any medical certificate to show that he was suffering from ill-health on 19.11.2008 and the entire evidence of RW-1 was closed. Particularly on 12.11.2008, the petitioner was present to mark the document but the documents filed along with I.A.No. 764 of 2008 were not traced out in the court bundle and on 19.11.2008 due to ill health the petitioner could not appear before the Court and moreover, by that time also the documents were not traced out. It is further stated that on 24.11.2008 his counsel assisted the section staff in tracing out the documents and after tracing the documents he appeared before the Court on 25.11.2008 and reported ready for marking of documents during the call work and the matter was kept passed over and by the time he reached, the order was passed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Special Court constituted under the Land Grabbing Act has to give cogent reasons so as to advance cause of justice and instead, it eschewed the complete evidence of RW-1. He also submits that the Special Court ought not to have dismissed the matter on technicalities and the entire evidence of RW-1 ought not to have been eschewed and that the reasoning given by the Special Court is unsustainable. Heard the learned counsel and perused the order impugned. Earlier, the petitioner filed Writ Petition Nos. 11600 and 15521 of 2006 and this court allowed the same by common order dated 31.7.2006 permitting the petitioner to file additional counter and lead additional evidence. It is stated that during the pendency of the above writ petitions, this Court granted stay of all further proceedings in LGC No. 27 of 1991 and in view of the common order passed dated 31.7.2006 in the above Writ Petitions, petitioner filed further documents and the matter was posted for marking the documents. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner the Special Court ought to have seen that the matters should not be dismissed on technicalities. Further, the reasons assigned by the Special Court are unsustainable and the same suffers from legal infirmity inasmuch as the order is passed eschewing the entire evidence. In the circumstances, the order passed by the Special Court is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the order dated 23.12.2008 passed by the Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad is quashed. The Special Court is directed to dispose of the matter in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible by giving reasonable opportunity to both sides. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ______________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR , J Dt. 22.06.2009 KA // TRUE COPY // ..... REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To 1 The REgistrar, Special Court Under AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition ) Act at B.R.K.R. Building, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 State of A.P. Rep by RDO, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 3. CC to G.P. for Revenue, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad. OUT 4. 2 CD copies