IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.17756, 17829, 17830, 17831, 17832 and 17833 of 2005. Between: G. Raja Reddy … Petitioner (in WP.No.17756 of 2005) G. Subrahmanyam Reddy … Petitioner (in WP.No.17829 of 2005) G. Ramachandra Reddy … Petitioner (in WP.No.17830 of 2005) G. Jayarami Reddy … Petitioner (in WP.No.17831 of 2005) G. Prameelamma … Petitioner (in WP.No.17832 of 2005) G. Ramakrishna Reddy … Petitioner (in WP.No.17833 of 2005) AND The Commissioner, Appeals, O/o. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad & others. … Respondents (in all writ petitions) Counsel for the petitioners : Sri N. Siva Reddy Counsel for the respondents : AGP for Revenue This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.17756, 17829, 17830, 17831, 17832 and 17833 of 2005. COMMON ORDER:- These writ petitions are filed questioning order dated 24.06.2005 passed in Appeal No.BCW3/953/2003 of respondent No.1, whereby he dismissed the appeal filed against order dated 19.05.2003 in D.Dis.No.E2/1697/96 passed by respondent No.2. In paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit filed by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Vedrukuppam Mandal, Chittoor District, it is stated that against the order passed by respondent No.1, which is the subject matter of these writ petitions, the petitioners filed revision petition No.35778/Assn-IV(2)/2005-1 dated 25.07.2005. At the hearing, Sri N. Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that due to communication gap, the present writ petitions are filed without being aware of filing of the revision petition and he admits that the revision petition was, in fact, filed by the petitioners and is pending. In view of the fact that the petitioners have already availed the remedy of revision even before filing these writ petitions and the said revision petition is pending, I am not inclined to adjudicate these writ petitions on merits. Therefore, all these writ petitions are dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to pursue the remedy of revision petition, which is pending before the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Considering the fact that the interim order granted by this Court is in force for nearly three years, I feel ends of justice would be met if the said interim order is continued for a period of three months and the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Assignments-IV) Department, is directed to dispose of the said revision petition within the said period of three months after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.Nos.22611, 22703, 22704, 22705, 22706 and 22707 of 2005 and WVMP.Nos.2729, 2672, 2670, 2728, 2682 and 2721 of 2005 are disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 09.07.2008 NOTE:- Registry shall mark a copy of this order to The Principal Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh. B/o. ES