THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4019 of 2009 ORDER: The father of the 1st petitioner by name Dodla Venkata Narsa Reddy, the father of the 2nd petitioner, by name Dodla Bhaskar Reddy and the 3rd petitioner herein were granted ryotwari pattas under the provisions of the Estates Abolition Act by the Settlement Officer, Nellore in the year 1970 in respect of various extents of land in different survey numbers of Kagithalapur Village, Nellore District. In R.P.No.65 of 1971 filed by one Mr. Mirza Muzamdar Hussain, pattas were cancelled by the Director of Settlements through order dated 02.01.1978. The petitioners filed W.P.No.2398 of 1978 challenging the same. The writ petition was allowed. Thereupon, Mirza Muzamdar Hussain filed W.A.No.142 of 1981. Through judgment dated 02.07.1987, a Division Bench of this Court left it open to the 3rd petitioner and the respective fathers of petitioners 1 and 2 to file a further revision before the respondent herein, against the order of the Director of Settlements. Accordingly, the revision was filed. For one reason or the other, the revision was not taken up for hearing. In the meanwhile, Venkata Narsa Reddy and Bhaskar Reddy died. There was delay in taking steps to bring their legal representatives on record. It is stated that the Advocate, who was pursuing the matter has also died. The respondent closed the revision vide order dated 05.02.2001. The petitioners filed application for restoration of the same. Their grievance is that the respondent is not entertaining the application. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent. Nearly three decades have elapsed, ever since the petitioners or their ancestors have been pursing their remedies against the order of cancellation of pattas. For quite some time, the proceedings are pending before this Court in the form of writ petition and writ appeal. As directed by this Court, the petitioners availed the remedy of revision. It was closed as abated, since the legal representatives were not brought on record. The petitioners state that their Advocate, who was pursuing the matter died and there was serious communication gap as to the proceedings pending before the respondent. This Court is of the view that the petitioners deserve to be given an opportunity, particularly when the entire delay is not attributable to them. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondent shall entertain the application filed by the petitioners for setting aside the order dated 05.02.2001, closing the revision and pass appropriate orders thereon. In case, the revision is restored, efforts shall be made by the respondent to dispose of the revision itself within two months from the date of restoration. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 23.04.2009 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4019 of 2009 Date: 23.04.2009 JSU