IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16567 of 2008 Between: Ankath Narayana S/o.Lachanna Died per L.R.Ankath Tirupathi, S/o.Narayana, R/o.Kanpa Mediguda village Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Addl. Agent to the Government and Project officer, ITDA, Adilabad Head Quarters, Utnoor, Adilabad Distric 2 The Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), Adilabad Head Quarters at Utnoor, Adilabad District 3 The Tahsildar,JainathMandal, Adilabad District 4 Parameshwaraiah S/o.Bhumaiah R/o.Kampa Mediguda village Jainath Mandal Adilabad District 5 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to assign the lands of the petitioner situated in SY.No.12 to an extent of Ac.4.33 guntas situate at Kanpa mediguda village,Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District to some other persons by dispossessing the petitioner from the lands though a statutory revision petition ﬁled by the petitioner is pending before the 5th respondent against the orders passed by the 2nd respondent in Case No.TWA2/1174/84 dated 8.5.1997 and conﬁrmed by the 1st respondent in Proc.No.A4/17/1997 dated 16.9.2006 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust violation of principles of natural justice opposed to equity and fair play and consequently direct the respondents not to assigning the lands of the petitioner inSy.No.12 to an extent of Ac.4.33 guntas situated at Kanpa mediguda village,Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District to others by dispossessing the petitioner from the petitioner from the lands pending disposal of the revision petition before the 5th respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.SURENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} O R D E R:- The writ petition is ﬁled by Ankath Narayana assailing the action of the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District in trying to dispossess him from the land bearing S.No.12 admeasuring Ac.4.33 guntas situated in Kanpa Mediguda village, Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District pending consideration of the revision before the 5th respondent-Government of A.P. The petitioner claims to be in occupation of Ac.4.33 guntas of land bearing S.No.12 situated in Kanpa Mediguda village, a notiﬁed village, KOF Jainadh Mandal, Adilabada District. According to the petitioner, his father purchased the land for a consideration of Rs.8000/- from Parameshwaraiah, who is the 4th respondent herein. Proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for ejectment. Ultimately, an order of ejectment came to be passed by the 2nd respondent-Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare). Assailing the orders passed by the 2nd respondent-primary authority, the petitioner ﬁled a statutory appeal as provided under the A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 read with Amended Regulation 1970 before the 1st respondent-Additional Agent to the Government. The appeal ended in dismissal and thereupon, he ﬁled a Revision before the 5th respondent-Government. Pending the revision, the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar is contemplating to dispossess the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition. When the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare received notices on behalf of respondents 1, 2 and 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a stay application was ﬁled before the revisional authority, but no orders have been passed thereon. He further submits that the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar is contemplating to dispossess the petitioner from the land in dispute and in which case, the very purpose of filing the revision will be defeated. The factual aspect of the pendency of the revision before the 5th respondent-Government is not in dispute. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 5th respondent-Government to consider the revision ﬁled by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. There shall b e Status Quo existing as on this day with regard to the possession of the land in dispute pending revision or till the disposal of the stay application whichever is earlier. No order as to costs _________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J 30th July, 2008 Note: Furnish copy in two days B/o bcj