G.Anandham vs Smt. K.Sulochana And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 6056 Tel

    THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

                                 AND

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

                 WRIT APPEAL No.757 of 2022


JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)


      Heard Mr. Munuga Sateesh, learned counsel for the

appellant and Mr. T.Rajinikanth Reddy, learned counsel for

respondent No.1/writ petitioner.

2. Appellant was respondent No.4 in W.P.No.10599 of

2022 which was heard along with W.P.No.10824 of 2022.

Writ Petition No.10599 of 2022 was filed by the 1st respondent

wherein appellant was the 4th respondent.

3. Both the writ petitions were allowed by the learned

Single Judge vide the order dated 19.09.2022. Against the

aforesaid order dated 19.09.2022 arising out of Writ Petition

No.10824 of 2022, the 4th respondent therein Sri G.Tuljaram

had preferred Writ Appeal No.714 of 2022. By the order dated

01.11.2022, this Court disposed of Writ Appeal No.714 of 2 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.757 of 2022

2022 by making necessary modifications in the order passed

by the learned Single Judge.

4. However, notwithstanding such order of the

Division Bench, the authorities have taken the view that the

writ appeal was not filed by the appellant. Therefore, the

present appeal has been preferred assailing the aforesaid

order of the learned Single Judge dated 19.09.2022 passed in

Writ Petition No.10599 of 2022.

5. For the sake of convenience, we extract the entire

order passed by us while disposing of Writ Appeal No.714 of

2022 on 01.11.2022. Order dated 01.11.2022 reads as

under:

"2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of Writ Petition Nos.10599 & 10824 of 2022 filed by respondent No.1 and another.

3. Writ Petition No.10599 of 2022 was filed by K.Sulochana assailing the order dated 21.01.2022 of the State Cooperative Tribunal, Telangana State (Tribunal) in I.A.No.178 of 2021 in CTA No.29 of 2021 directing the parties to maintain status quo in respect of second subject land.

                                   3                        HCJ & CVBRJ
                                                      W.A.No.757 of 2022

4. Writ Petition No.10824 of 2022 was filed by the 1st respondent assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 21.01.2022 passed by the Tribunal in I.A.No.177 of 2021 in CTA No.28 of 2021 directing the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the first subject property.

5. Description of the first subject property is as under:

"Plot No.489 in Sy.No.203/P, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209 and 210P admeasuring 181 sq. yards situated at Manikonda Jagir Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District."

6. Likewise description of the second subject property is as under:

"Plot No.580 in Sy.No.203/P, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209 and 210P admeasuring 217 sq. yards situated at Manikonda Jagir Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District."

7. It appears that Hyderabad District Government Employees Cooperative Housing Society Ltd.

(Society) has allotted the first subject property to 1st respondent/writ petitioner and the second subject property to K.Sulochana. Aggrieved by the same, appellant preferred application before the Deputy Registrar-cum-Arbitrator under Section 61 of the Telangana Co-operative Societies Act, 1964. Deputy Registrar dismissed the two applications of the appellant, against which appellant filed CTA Nos.28 & 29 of 2021 4 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.757 of 2022

before the Tribunal. Interlocutory applications were filed in the two appeals in which separate two identical orders were passed by the Tribunal on 21.01.2022 directing the parties to maintain status quo. Assailing the above two orders, the related two writ petitions came to be filed. The two writ petitions were allowed by the learned Single Judge in the following terms:

"Even though the learned counsel for the unofficial respondents has opposed the granting of any orders by this Court suspending the interim orders of the Tribunal, this Court having regard to the facts that the petitioners are in possession of the subject lands, that they have already raised constructions therein, as evidenced by the photographs filed by them, is of the opinion that balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioners and no prejudice would be caused to the unofficial respondents if the petitioners are permitted to complete the constructions pending disposal of the main CTAs. On the otherhand, if they are not allowed to complete the building, they will sustain irreparable loss as they have spent substantial amounts for getting building permissions and laid slabs too. Moreover, the petitioners have given an undertaking that they will not seek any equities if any adverse orders are passed against them in the CTAs filed by the unofficial respondents herein before the Tribunal.

Having regard to the above, the impugned orders are set aside and the Tribunal is directed to dispose of CTA Nos. 28 and 29 of 2021, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that in case any adverse orders are passed by the Tribunal against the petitioners, they shall not seek any equities. To that effect, the petitioners shall file affidavits before the Tribunal within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of 5 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.757 of 2022

this order. Further, pending disposal of the CTAs before the Tribunal, the petitioners shall not sell or create any third party interest over the subject properties.

Both the writ petitions are allowed to the extent indicated above."

8. In the course of hearing, we have been informed that CTA Nos.28 & 29 of 2021 are fixed for hearing before the Tribunal on 10.11.2022. If that be the position, we are of the view that learned Single Judge was not justified in allowing the writ petitioners to carry out the constructions in as much as if the constructions are carried out and completed, it may lead to unforeseen consequences. This is more so when the status quo orders were passed way back on 21.01.2022 and the appeals are now at the stage of hearing. We are of the further view that it would be in the interest of justice if the status quo order is continued till the appeals are finally heard and decided.

9. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the learned Single Judge dated 19.09.2022 with the further direction that so far respondent No.1/writ petitioner i.e., M.Narayana is concerned, Tribunal shall dispose of CTA Nos.28 & 29 of 2021 within a period of three (03) months from the date of hearing i.e., from 10.11.2022. Both the parties shall cooperate with the hearing before the Tribunal. Status quo order shall be continued for the aforesaid period of three (03) months.

10. We make it clear that any observations made by the Tribunal while granting the status quo order shall not influence the final hearing. We further make it clear 6 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.757 of 2022

that observations made by the learned Single Judge shall also not influence the outcome of the appeals before the Tribunal. We have not expressed any opinion on merit and all contentions are kept open.

11. This disposes of the Writ Appeal. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

12. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed."

6. We therefore make it clear that the aforesaid order

as extracted above would cover the case of the present

appellant Sri G.Anandham as well.

7. Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed of. However,

there shall be no order as to costs.

8. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if

any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.

__________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

___________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J

Date: 22.11.2022 KL