THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20504 OF 2007 ORDER: The predecessor in title of the petitioners claimed to be the protected tenant in respect of Acs.4.5 of land in survey Nos.77/1, 78 and 78/2 of Mahaboobnagar Revenue Village. The original owner is said to be one late Abdul Rehman Khan. The petitioners are dispossessed from the land by the District Wakf Board, Mahaboobnagar, the 2nd respondent herein, on the ground that the original owner has gifted the land to the 2nd respondent. The petitioner and others filed applications under Sections 32 (1) and 40 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (for short ‘the Act’) before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Mahaboobnagar, for declaration of their rights and recovery of possession. Their grievance is that even while the applications are pending, the respondents 1 to 3 accorded permission to respondents 4 and 5 to make construction on part of the land. It is also urged that the Municipality did not accord permission to the respondents 4 and 5. With this background, the petitioners seek directions to prevent the respondents 4 and 5 from making any construction. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for revenue and learned standing Counsel for the Municipality. None appears for the respondents 4 and 5. 3. Admittedly, the petitioners are not in possession of the property in question and their applications for declaration of their rights and recovery of possession are pending adjudication before the Mandal Revenue Officer. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the applications filed under Sections 32 and 40 of the Act have since been dismissed and that an appeal is pending. 4. As of now, the rights of the petitioners are not recognized by any authority or agency. It is only when their rights are declared by a competent Court of law or authority that the petitioners can raise objections for construction made by the respondents 4 and 5. Further, in the event of any authority passing any order in favour of the petitioners for restoration of possession, the mere fact that construction is made therein, would not come in the way. 5. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing that the construction said to have been made by the respondents 4 and 5 shall be without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners and that may be determined in the proceedings initiated under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J March 17, 2011 KTL