THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23672 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioners state that feeling aggrieved by the developments over a piece of land in premises bearing Nos.3-5-1102 and 3-5-1102/1, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad, they have submitted a representation, dated 01.10.2009, to M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, respondent No.4 herein. The background of the litigation, such as pendency of O.S.Nos.277 of 2000, 337 of 2001 etc., was mentioned. The attention of respondent No.4 was also drawn to certain interlocutory orders said to have been passed therein. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.4 is not considering the said representation at all and that in the meanwhile, some of the party respondents have established a Petroleum Outlet on the land. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4 and the learned counsel for respondent No.7. Several suits are pending as between the petitioners and respondent Nos. 5 and 6 in relation to large extent of property at Narayanaguda. One of the parties to the suits appears to have transferred or granted lease over a portion of the land in favour of respondent No.7, who, in turn, sublet the same to respondent No.4. All this resulted in establishment of Petroleum Outlet. Though a wider relief is claimed in this writ petition, this Court is not inclined to consider the same. Once the parties have approached the civil Court, they have to await the outcome. In case any interim orders are violated, they have to prosecute the remedies in accordance with law. It is not out of place to mention that one of the parties in civil proceedings, namely respondent No.6 herein, has approached this Court by filing W.P.No.23017 of 2009 complaining about the establishment of Petroleum Outlet and this Court did not grant any relief in it. Be that as it may, respondent No.4 cannot refuse to entertain the representation made by the petitioners, particularly, when it answers the definition of State. On a consideration of the representation, it may arrive at its own conclusion and communicate the same to the petitioners. That would enable the petitioners to work out their remedies. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that respondent No.4 shall take into account the representation, dated 01.10.2009, submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereon, within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:04.11.2009 kdl