IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.13257 of 2007 Between: 1 Rayudu Balaraju, So. Appanna, R/o. D.No.1-113, Narasingapuram Village, Pithapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. 2 Rayudu Ganeswara Rao, S/o.Appanna, R/o.D.No.2-38, Narasingapuram Village, Pithapuram Mandal, E.G. District. 3 Puppala Venkata Ratnam, S/o.Ramanjaneya, R/o.D.No.1-107, Narasingapuram Village, Pithapuram, E.G.District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, Kakinada, E.G.District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, E.G.District. 3 The Tahsildar, Pithapuram Mandal, E.G.District. 4 Pita Venkata Madhuri, D/o. Venkateswarlu, R/o. Narasingapuram Village, ZPTC, Pithapuram, E.,G.District. .....RESPONDENTS 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, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings issued by the 1st respondent vide D.Dis.E3/3246/2007, D.Dis.E3/324/2007 and D.Dis.E3/3248/2007 dt.11.6.2007 to the petitioners is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of Natural Justice and consequently set the proceedings D.Dis.E3/3246/2007, D.Dis.E3/3247/2007 and D.Dis.E3/3248/2007 dt.11.6.2007 at naught. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.S.SUBBA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.13257 of 2007 ORDER: Three petitioners claim that they are absolute owners of property bearing Door Nos.1-113, 2-38 and 1-107 of Narasingapuram Village of Pithapuram Mandal in East Godavari District. Third respondent initiated action under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1905 (the Act, for brevity). An order of eviction was passed on 26.5.2007. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners ﬁled appeal before District Collector on 31.5.2007 and also prayed for stay of order of third respondent. Initially stay was granted on 01.6.2007. However by impugned order dated 11.6.2007, ﬁrst respondent while transferring appeal to second respondent (Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Kakinada) for disposal of the same under Section 10(1) of the Act, vacated interim order, aggrieved by which, present writ petition is filed. This Court, after hearing learned Counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General-Andhra), is of considered opinion that as the appeal stands remitted to second respondent for disposal, if stay is not granted and/or petitioners are evicted pending appeal, appeal itself would be rendered useless. Therefore while ordering status quo as on today, this Court further directs second respondent to dispose of the appeal ﬁled by petitioners, which was transferred by District Collector to second respondent, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition, with the above observations and directions, is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ (V.V.S.RAO,J) November 17, 2008 YS To 1 The District Collector, Kakinada, E.G.District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, E.G.District. 3 The Tahsildar, Pithapuram Mandal, E.G.District. 4 Two CCs to Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 5 Two CD copies.