JUDGMENT : Arup Kumar Goswami, J. 1. Heard Mr. Vattikuti Sreemannarayana, learned counsel representing Mr. S.D. Gowd, learned counsel for the appellants. 2. Also heard the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development for respondent No.1 and Mr. N. Ranga Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2. 3. This writ appeal is preferred against an interim order dated 11.02.2021 passed by a learned single Judge in W.P.No.1138 of 2021. The appellants are the petitioners in the said writ petition. 4. By the aforesaid order, the learned single Judge issued a direction to allow the writ petitioners to make use of the left over land measuring 8 feet 6 inches x 86 feet. However, it was made clear that any temporary constructions can only be made after obtaining proper permissions. 5. It is with regard to the above observation that any temporary constructions can only be made after obtaining proper permissions, objection is taken by filing this writ appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants relied on a judgment dated 22.03.2018 passed in W.A.No.477 of 2018 to contend that the fact situation in the present case is similar to the one in the said case and the Division Bench of this Court, in the said judgment, did not give any direction to obtain proper permission before making temporary constructions. Learned counsel for the appellants has also referred to the order dated 27.10.2017 passed in W.P.No.35577 of 2017 by learned single Judge (filed at Page No.26 of the appeal papers), as against which the aforesaid W.A.No.477 of 2018 had been preferred. 7. A perusal of the order dated 27.10.2017 in W.P.No.35577 of 2017 goes to show that, amongst others, a clear finding was recorded by the learned single Judge that very demolition of the shops of the petitioner therein was patently illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. It was in the context of the said finding, it appears that the observations, as alluded to by the learned counsel for the appellants, appear in the order of the Division Bench. 8. In the instant case, a writ petition, being W.P.No.34143 of 2017 on the subject of demolition, is pending. It was in the context of the said finding, it appears that the observations, as alluded to by the learned counsel for the appellants, appear in the order of the Division Bench. 8. In the instant case, a writ petition, being W.P.No.34143 of 2017 on the subject of demolition, is pending. That apart, the prayer made in the writ petition is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to allow the writ petitioners to make use of the left over 8.6 x 86 feet area situated on the Hindupur Main Road, Gandhi Circle, Kalyandurgam, Anantapur District, by raising temporary construction. The writ petition is yet to be decided finally and, therefore, we are of the opinion that no interference is called for with regard to the order passed by the learned single Judge. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.