(Prayer: IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the orders passed by the learned single judge in W.P No.10221 of 2026 dated 17-04-2026 pending disposal of the Writ Appeal)

Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.

1. Heard Sri V.V.Satish, learned counsel for the appellants and Ms.M.Abhigna, learned counsel representing Sri Javvaji Sarath Chandra, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 3 to 6.

2. The writ appellants are respondents Nos.5 and 6; Respondents Nos.1 and 2 herein are the writ petitioners; and the remaining respondents are the other respondents in the writ petition.

3. This writ appeal is directed against the interim order, dated 17.04.2026, passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.10221 of 2026.

4. The writ petitioners filed W.P.No.10221 of 2026 challenging the order dated 02.01.2026 passed by respondent No. 2 (4th respondent herein) in R.P. No. 06 of 2025 upholding the order passed by respondent No.3 (5th respondent herein) in D.Dis.No.125 of 2024, dated 18.02.2025, contending that the order impugned are arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971.

5. At the stage of admission, learned Single Judge has passed the impugned interim order, which reads as follows:

               “When this Court queried a question to the learned counsel for the respondents as to what are the three grounds to exercise Certiorari jurisdiction, he is unable to answer the query raised by this Court.

               Hence, there shall be an interim direction as prayed for, for a period of six (06) weeks.

               List the matter after Summer Vacation, 2026.”

6. The impugned order makes it evident that a query was raised by learned Single Judge in the writ petition to the learned counsel for the respondents therein regarding the grounds on which a writ of Certiorari could be issued and the learned counsel could not answer the query. So, the interim direction as prayed for was granted in favour of the writ petitioners.

7. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, on 05.05.2026, while admitting the writ appeal, has granted interim suspension of the impugned order. The interim order reads as under:

               “…there shall be interim suspension of the impugned order dated 17.04.2026 passed in writ petition No.10221 of 2026, till the next date of hearing.”

8. It would not be out of place to mention the settled principle of law that the plaintiff in a suit should not succeed on the weakness of the defendant’s case. He has to stand on his own legs. Similarly, unless a case for grant of interim order was made out, the interim order could not be passed only on the failure of the respondents’ counsel to state the grounds on which Writ of Certiorari could be issued. The respondents had not challenged the orders. It was for the writ petitioner to prima facie satisfy the grounds for issuance of a writ of Certiorari and the grounds involved in the writ petition and thereby make out a case for the grant of interim relief.

9. There is also no consideration of the case of the writ petitioners or of the respondents, even prima facie.

10. The impugned order cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside.

11. The writ petition is pending. The application seeking interim relief is pending. The same deserves to be considered in accordance with law, with opportunity of hearing to the parties.

12. The writ appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

13. Learned counsel for the respondents Nos.1 and 2 submits urgency for consideration of the interim prayer. If it is so, the appropriate course in the writ petition is open to the writ petitioners.

14. There shall be no order as to costs.

15. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ appeal shall stand closed.