HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B.LOKUR AND HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.200 OF 2011 Dt: 29-12-2011. Between: YANAMADALA NAGESWARA RAO .. APPELLANT AND MARELLA SRINIVASA RAO AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B.LOKUR AND HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.200 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: (PER HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI Madan B.Lokur) The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 6.10.2010 passed by a learned single Judge in W.P.No.25050 of 2010. 2. The prayer made in the writ petition was for disposal of an application dated 23.11.2009 for grant of house sites and to complete the enquiry contemplated under R.C. B.1035/05. 3. The learned single Judge, by the order under appeal, directed the official respondents to dispose of the representation within a period of two months. 4. Feeling aggrieved, respondent No.4 before the learned single Judge has filed this writ appeal. 5. It is submitted that the direction given by the learned single Judge for disposal of the representation made by the writ petitioner was without any notice to the appellant. 6. On being asked what prejudice has been caused to the appellant, it is stated at the Bar that an enquiry on the same subject had already been conducted and closed by the official respondents. When we asked learned counsel for the appellant to tell us where such an averment has been made, he has drawn our attention to paragraph No.5 of the affidavit, which merely says that according to him, the proceedings are deemed to have been dropped. This is completely different from what has been stated at the Bar. 7. We are told by learned counsel for the writ petitioner that notice of the enquiry has been given to the appellant and he is actually participating in the enquiry. That being the position, we are not inclined to interfere in this writ appeal. 8. The writ appeal is dismissed. Miscellaneous application is also dismissed. ( MADAN B.LOKUR, CJ ) Dt: 29-12-2011. ( SANJAY KUMAR, J ) TNB