IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 22931 of 2008 Between: Gadaparthi Ramachandram @ Chandram, S/o. Narsaiah, R/o. Mandalapalli Village, Dammapeta Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Principal Secretary to Government, Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Additional Agent to Government & Project Officer I.T.D.A. Bhadrachalam, Khammam Dist. 3 The Special Deputy Collector (T.W.), Bhadrachalam. 4 The Tahsildar Dammapeta Mandal, Khammam Dist. .....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 writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus, declaring the in action of the 1st respondent in passing appropriate orders on the Revision itself ﬁled on dt.06-10-2008 against the order of 2nd respondent dated 28-6-2008 in I.A. No. 26/2003 as illegal arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondent No.1 to consider and dispose of the Revision itself with in a reasonable time and also further direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from possession and enjoyment of the subject property in S.No.80/8 measuirng extent of Acs.1-02 gts., situated Mandalapalli Village of Dammapet Mandal, pending disposal of the revision on the ﬁle of the 1st respondent, and may be pleased to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: This writ petition has been ﬁled by Gadaparthi Ramachandram @ Chandram, assailing action of the Tahsildar, Dammapeta Mandal, Khammam District in trying to dispossess him from the land bearing Sy. No. 80/8 admeasuring Ac.1.02 guntas situated at Mandalapalli village of Dammapeta Mandal, pending revision before the first respondent. The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of an extent of Ac.1.02 guntas comprised in Sy. No. 80/8 situated at Mandalapalli village of Dammapeta Mandal. Proceedings have been initiated against him for eviction from the land in his occupation on the ground that his occupation is in contravention of the provisions of A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970. The Primary Authority conducted enquiry and found possession of the petitioner over the land in question is in contravention of the provisions of A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970. The petitioner preferred an appeal being I.A. No. 26 of 2003. The Additional Agent to Government and Project Oﬃcer, ITDA, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District, entertained the appeal and proceeded to dismiss the appeal and conﬁrmed the order passed by the Primary Authority. Thereupon, the petitioner ﬁled a revision before the ﬁrst respondent and also moved application seeking stay of the order passed by the Primary Authority, as conﬁrmed by the Appellate Authority. Pending, revision, the Tahsildar, Dammapeta Mandal, the fourth respondent herein, initiated steps to eject the petitioner from his land. Hence, the writ petition. When the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare received notice on behalf of the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of Respondents 1 to 4. The factual aspect of the petitioner ﬁling revision before the ﬁrst respondent is not in dispute. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the ﬁrst respondent to consider the revision filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. There shall be status quo existing as on this day with regard to the possession of the land in dispute till disposal of the revision or the stay application, whichever is earlier. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ B.Seshasayana Reddy, J. October 21, 2008 Operative portion by wire at party’s costs //BO// MAS