THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.21818 of 2008 and 7664 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: These two writ petitions are inter-related. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in W.P.No.21818 of 2008. The 1st petitioner is the husband of the 2nd petitioner. It is stated that Sri Bitragunta Krishna Reddy, the father of the 1st petitioner purchased an extent of about Ac.25.00 in Survey Nos.541, 542 and 543 of Bogolu Village and Mandal, Nellore District from one Sri Devireddy Sesha Reddy, the father of the 3rd respondent in the year 1969 under an agreement of sale. Krishna Reddy is said to have executed a will in favour of the 1st petitioner and the latter in turn is stated to have given the property to the second petitioner under a deed of settlement. The second petitioner filed O.S.No.164 of 2001 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kavali, against the 3rd respondent for the relief of perpetual injunction. In I.A.No.881 of 2001, an order of temporary injunction is said to have been passed. It is also stated that the Tahsildar, Bogolu, and the District Collector, Nellore have been impleaded as defendants 2 and 3 in the suit. W.P.No.21818 of 2008 is filed alleging that at the instance of respondents 2 and 3, the Station House Officer, Bitragunta, 1st respondent herein is registering cases and harassing the petitioners, despite the existence of an order of temporary injunction. W.P.No.7664 of 2009 is filed with a prayer to restrain the Tahsildar from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property mentioned above. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. The second petitioner has already filed a suit for injunction in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kavali. Though she did not implead the Tahsildar and other revenue authorities, on their own accord, they got impleaded in the suit. The 2nd petitioner has already obtained an order of temporary injunction. On behalf of the Tahsildar, it is represented that the land vested in the Government under the provisions of the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act. Now that the Tahsildar and the District Collector are parties to the suit, the petitioners can file an application, seeking injunction against them also. The trial Court can examine the matter with reference to the relevant records and pass appropriate orders. These two writ petitions are not maintainable, when admittedly the petitioners are pursuing remedies in the suit. Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of leaving it open to the petitioners to seek appropriate orders from the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kavali, in the pending suit. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 18.04.2009 Note: Issue C.C. in three days. (B/o) JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.21818 of 2008 and 7664 of 2009 Date: 18.04.2009 JSU