IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 19379 of 2007 Between: C. Sada Sivappa, S/o. C. Pedda Nagappa, R/o. 1-39A, Enumulapally Post, Puttaparthy Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 District Collector, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 2 Revenue Divisional Officer, Penukonda, Anantapur District. 3 The Tahsildar, Puttaparthy Mandal, Anantapur District. .....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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not passing any orders on the representation of the Petitioner dated 25-7-2007 as well as the action of the 3rd Respondent in proceeding with the construction of compound wall in and around the land to an extent of Ac. 3-21 cents in Sy.No. 22-4 situated Enumulapalli Village, Puttaparthy Mandal, Anantapur District without leaving Rasta to the petitioner's land in Sy.No. 409-1 of Enumulapalli Village, Puttaparthy Mandal Anantapur District, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and pass such or further orders as are necessary. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.E.MARUTHI RAJA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that along with his two brothers, he acquired land in an extent of 0.40 cents in Sy.No.409-1 situated at Enumulapalli Village, Puttaparthy Mandal, Anantapur District and after partition among them, all of them are cultivating their respective extents individually. It is stated that on the front side of his land there is a land to an extent of Ac.3.21 cents in Sy.No.22-4. Of the said land, the petitioners and his brothers occupied an extent of Ac.0.78 cents and cultivating the same for past several years and they also made an application for assignment of the said land. When there was an attempt by the revenue authorities to dispossess them from the said land, he along with other neighbouring land owner approached this Court in W.P.No.6295 of 1993 and this Court vide order dated 5.5.1993 granted directions not to dispossess the petitioners, if they are in possession of the said land except in accordance with law. While the matters stood thus, the said land was allotted to Theame Park along with some other lands vide Collectors orders dated 5.6.2006. After coming to know about the said allotment, the petitioner is stated to have made a representation to the authorities on 25.7.2007 stating that if the said land is allotted to the theame park, he would be deprived of the path way to enter his patta land in Sy.No.409- 1, which is situated on the back side of the said land and requested the 1st respondent not to proceed with the construction of compound wall or else to leave a space of 15 feet towards rasta to enable him to enter the land. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though he made the representation in the year 2007, so far the same is not disposed of and on the other hand the 3rd respondent is proceeding with the construction of compound wall and, therefore, he filed the present writ petition. The matter was called on several occasions and in spite of granting suﬃcient time, the learned Government Pleader has not reported any instructions. However, he submitted that since the petitioner has already submitted his representation as long back as in the year 2007 and the same is still pending consideration, instead of this Court going into the merits of the matter, the authorities may be directed to dispose of the said representation, for which the learned counsel for the petitioner also agreed. In the circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1 st respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 25.7.2007 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. -------------------- N.V.RAMANA, J. 26th August 2008 CVRK ... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies