On the ground of violation of easementary rights, writ petition was filed by the first respondent herein which came to be disposed of with a direction to the official respondents to enquire into his claim and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after hearing the alleged violators. Going by the order we find nothing wrong with it, but when read in the background of the case, it is a direction for initiation of parallel proceedings. We say so because the first respondent has invoked civil court’s jurisdiction through original suit (O.S. No.275 of 2010) in the Court of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore, but of no avail, consequently civil miscellaneous appeal before the appellate forum which is sub judice and it emerges that the civil suit was filed prior to the Writ Petition. It is also not denied that appeal arising out of the aforementioned suit is pending disposal, therefore, direction to the official respondents to embark upon the scope of easementary rights of the appellant in a writ petition is uncalled for. In that view of the matter, we find no option but to set aside the impugned order. As a corollary, writ appeal is allowed and writ petition shall stand dismissed.
