AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
These matters are taken up for hearing as it has been suggested by the parties that similar questions of fact and law are involved in all these writ appeals.
Issue notice.
Mr.V.Sreenidhi, learned additional government advocate, accepts notice for the respondents in all the writ appeals. Therefore, formal service of notice to them is dispensed with.
The Hon''ble Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions, inter alia, on the ground that there has been an alternative and efficacious remedy available to the writ petitioners.
A proceeding was initiated by the Deputy Commissioner concerned, suo motu, on the basis of a report of the Tahsildar, for cancellation of the khata standing in the names of the writ petitioners.
The Hon''ble Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions holding, inter alia, that the writ petitioners had an alternative and efficacious remedy by way of an appeal.
It is an admitted position that a proceeding has been initiated suo motu by the Deputy Commissioner, concerning the selfsame property and concerning the selfsame parties, in which the Assistant Commission has been a party.
It is submitted by Mr.D.N.Nanjunda Reddy, learned senior advocate appearing in support of the writ appeals, that the Assistant Commissioner should not have initiated a proceeding when the matter was pending before his superior authority.
Therefore, the order impugned is set aside. The proceeding initiated by the Assistant Commissioner and the consequential order passed by him is, also, quashed.
We direct the Deputy Commissioner to consider the matter, which has been pending before him, in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observation made by the Assistant Commissioner. We, however, express no opinion on merits.
The writ appeals are allowed.
There will be no order as to costs.
In view of the disposal of the writ appeals, the pending interlocutory applications in all the writ appeals do not survive for consideration and are, accordingly, dismissed.