IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI DEVINDER GUPTA,THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NARAYANA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 42 of 2005 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 25/10/2004 in WP NO : 7289 OF 2004 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Smt. M. Jyothi, W/o. M. Sanjeeva, R/o. H.No. 7-150/1, Raju Colony, Balanagar, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1. M/s. Vinayaka Nagar Welfare Association, Regd.No. 2686/94, Rep. by its General Secretary S. Venkata Reddy, Office at 10-23 Vinayaka Nagar HAL Post, Balanagar, Ranga Reddy District. 2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 3. The Commissioner, Kukatapally Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. 4. M. Sanjeeva Rao, S/o. Narsing Rao, Municipal Councilor, 11th Ward, Kukatpally Municipality, R/o. 7-151/1, Raju Colony, Balanagar, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.K.SANKARAYYA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: The G.P. for Revenue Counsel for the Respondent No.3: Mr.Polisetty Radhakrishna Counsel for the Respondent No.4: Mr.K.R.Sridharan The Court at the stage of admission, made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice) The appellant was not a party to the writ petition and is aggrieved by the order disposing of the writ petition filed by the first respondent particularly about the findings recorded therein that land admeasuring 400 sq. yards belongs to the Government and directions issued against respondents 2 and 3 herein to take appropriate steps for utilizing the land for any convenient public purpose in accordance with law. Since the appellant is claiming interest in the land and she claims to be adversely affected, in this appeal, we will not decide such questions and we leave the matter to be decided afresh by the learned single Judge by setting aside the impugned order and directing the writ petition to be decided afresh after hearing the appellant as well after obtaining the appellant’s version. Appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The writ petition will be decided afresh. The appellant is directed to be impleaded as the third respondent in the writ petition. List the Writ Petition before the learned single Judge on 14-2-2005. ___________________ DEVINDER GUPTA, CJ 19-1-2005 ____________________ M.NARAYANA REDDY, J tvr To 1. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 2. The Commissioner, Kukatapally Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. 3. 2 CCs to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 4. One CC to the Section Officer, Writ Filing Section, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad.