THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.24226 of 2011 Dated 27th August, 2011 Between: Darga and others …Petitioners And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Municipal Adminsitration & Urban Development Department, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri N.Subba Rao Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Municipal Administration Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 4: Sri R.Radha Krishna Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside technical sanction, dated 24.01.2011, given by respondent No.3, for approval of layout permission in favour of respondent No.5 in respect of the lands admeasuring Acs.1.10 guntas in Survey No.128, Acs.2.03 guntas in Survey No.129, Acs.2.24 guntas in Survey No.130 and Ac.0.13 guntas in Survey No.131 of Upperpally Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners and respondent No.5 are locked in dispute over the above-mentioned lands. When respondent No.5 sought for approval of layout, the petitioners have filed their objections before respondent No.3, which were rejected and technical sanction was accorded by respondent No.3 on 24.01.2011. The petitioners have pleaded that the revision petition filed by them against the order of Tahsildar, Rajendranagar, R.R.District, mutating the name of respondent No.5 in the revenue records under the provisions of the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 was allowed by the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District vide his proceedings bearing No.D1/7585/2010, dated 11.08.2011 and that in the face of the said order, respondent No.5 has lost its claim over the property in question and therefore, it is not entitled to release of the layout. In normal course, respondent No.5 ought to be given notice. However, as this Court is not inclined to adjudicate the writ petition on merits for the reason that it is for respondent No.2 to consider the effect of order, dated 11.08.2011, of the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, before the final layout is released, it would be appropriate that respondent No.2 issues notice to the petitioners and respondent No.5 and take a decision on the application of respondent No.5 for release of final layout after hearing both the parties. It is, however, made clear that this direction will apply only if respondent No.2 has not already released the final layout by now. If the final layout was already released, the petitioners shall be free to question the same by availing appropriate remedy. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.29714 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 27th August, 2011 VGB