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 : 22942 of 2008 Between: Sri.P.Krishna Murthy, S/o. Purushotham rao, Arunodaya School, Manuguru Village & Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Agent to Government & Project Officer, I.T.D.A. Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. 2 The Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), Bhadrachalam, Khamma District. 3 The Tahsildar, Manuguru Mandal at Manuguru, Khammam District. 4 Bandari Ramesh, S/o. Not known R/o. Manuguru Village & Mandal, Khammam 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 or direction preferably writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in not passing appropriate orders either on the stay petition or on the appeal itself ﬁled on 22-9-2008 against the order of 2nd respondent dt. 10-6-2008 in LTR Case No. 293/2007/MNGR as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to consider and dispose of the stay petition or the appeal itself within a reasonable time and further direct the respondents or their subordinate staﬀ not to dispossess me from possession and enjoyment of the property in Sy.No. 132 measuring an extent of Acs 2-04 gs situated at Manuguru Village and Mandal of Khammam District pending disposal of the appeal on the ﬁle of the 1st Respondent and pass any other order 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 P.Krishna Murthy, assailing action of the Tahsildar, Manuguru Mandal, Khammam District in trying to dispossess him from the land bearing Sy. No. 132 admeasuring Ac.2.04 guntas situated at Manuguru village and Mandal, pending appeal before the first respondent. The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of an extent of Ac.2.04 guntas comprised in Sy. No. 132 situated at Manuguru village and 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 along with an application seeking stay, which is pending before the ﬁrst respondent. Pending appeal before the ﬁrst respondent, the Tahsildar, Manuguru Mandal, the third 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 1 to 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of Respondents 1 to 3. The factual aspect of the petitioner ﬁling appeal 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 appeal 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 appeal 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