HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4006 of 2011 Date: November 05, 2011 Between: 1. Ravi Goud & another … Petitioners and Madi Brahmanand Reddy … Respondent * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4006 of 2011 O R D E R: Petitioners, who suffered an ex parte injunction order under proceedings of the Agency Divisional Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad, in Proceedings No.A/1531/2011 dated 19.8.2011, approached this Court primarily contending that by the aforesaid proceedings the Agency Divisional Officer has granted ex parte injunction against the petitioners and it is alleged that the said order would amount to dispossession of the petitioners. 2. On 16.9.2011 while issuing notice on admission, on finding that the said order impugned in this C.R.P. was passed without hearing and notice to the petitioners, the operation of impugned order was stayed. 3. Respondent’s counsel now appears and asserts that the respondent is in possession from 1985 onwards and as such the impugned order is clearly justified. 4. This Court, in its revisional jurisdiction, would not adjudicate on factual aspects. In the present case, as the proceedings are pending before the Agency Divisional Officer, Adilabad, the only short issue which arises for consideration is whether the impugned order is justified as the petitioners were neither given any notice nor were heard. In view of the fact that the said impugned order has been stayed by this Court for the last over two months, justice would be met by disposing of this C.R.P with the following directions: (1) Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners have already filed counter-affidavit as well as written statement in the aforesaid proceedings before the Agency Divisional Officer. In that view of the matter, it would be appropriate to direct the Agency Divisional Officer to fix the date of hearing within next four weeks and hear the petitioners as well as the respondent on the interim application of the respondent and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. (2) The status quo existing as on today shall be maintained by both the parties till the Agency Divisional Officer passes orders on the interim application as directed above. 5. The civil revision petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Date: November 05, 2011. BSB