HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 9278 of 2002 DATED: 09.02.2010 Between: Smt.Masroor Fathima .. Petitioner And The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority Rep. by its Estate Officer .. Respondent O R D E R:- The petitioner asserts that she purchased a residential plot bearing No.233-A from Sri Venkateswara Co-operative House Building Society, under a registered sale deed dated 28.10.1992, and since then he has been in possession and enjoyment of the same and raised a compound wall around it. She states that the Mandal Revenue Officer, Shaikpet Mandal, issued a letter dated 21.03.2000 certifying that the land in possession of the petitioner belongs to her and she is not an encroacher. Now, the main grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent-HUDA issued the impugned proceedings dated 08.05.2002 directing the petitioner to remove the compound wall/structures constructed in an extent of 281.00 Sq. mts. of land, within one week or otherwise, it will be demolished and possession will be resumed by H.U.D.A. without issuing any further notice or information. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking to quash the impugned proceedings. The learned Standing Counsel for Hyderabad Urban Development Authority appearing for the respondent, has submitted that against the Proceedings impugned in this writ petition, a statutory appeal lies to the District Judge under Section 9 of the A.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1968 (for short “the Act”) and the petitioner, without exhausting the remedy of statutory appeal, has filed this writ petition, which, at this stage, is not maintainable, and the same is liable to be dismissed. Inasmuch as the petitioner has got an affective alternative remedy by way of an appeal under Section 9 of the Act, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The petitioner is directed to file an appeal before the appellate authority/District Judge as provided under Section 9 of the Act, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and on such appeal being filed, the appellate authority/District Judge, shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that during the pendency of such appeal, the impugned proceedings dated 08.05.2002 issued by the respondent shall not be given effect to.” With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________ C.V. RAMULU, J. 9th February, 2010. bcj