THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9252 of 2011 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondents. This writ petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is hereby prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in not disposing the statutory revision filed against the orders passed by the Additional Agent to the Government, Bhadrachalam in C.M.A.No.40/2007, dated 22.01.2011 confirming the orders passed by the Special Deputy Collector (T.W.) Palvoncha in LTR Case No.322/95/APT, dated 21.08.1997 for eviction in respect of the lands situated in Sy.No.167/2 to an extent of Acs.9.06 guntas situated at Jammigudem Village of Ashwaraopeta Mandal of Khammam District as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300(A) of the Constitution of India and consequentially declare that the respondents cannot dispossess the petitioner from the property in question pending disposal of the Revision before the Revisional Authority.” It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.9.06 guntas in Survey No.167/2 situated at Jammigudem Village, Ashwaraopeta Mandal, Khammam District. It is his further case that the said land was purchased from its earlier owner, by name, Penumarthi Subramanya Suryanarayana Raju, vide agreement of sale, dated 10.07.1969 and he was inducted into actual and physical possession of the same. On the ground that transfer of the said land in favour of the petitioner is in violation of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1979, the third respondent - Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), Palvoncha, by his order, dated 21.08.1997, in LTR.Case.No.322/95/APT, ordered eviction of the petitioner from the aforesaid land and directed the fourth respondent - Tahsildar, Ashwaraopeta Mandal, Khammam District, to take the said land into Government custody and assign the same to eligible tribals. As against the said order, the petitioner carried the matter by way of appeal before the second respondent - Additional Agent to the Government, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District, in C.M.A.No.40 of 2007, and it was ended in dismissal by order, dated 22.01.2011. Further, as against the said order of the appellate authority confirming the order of the primary authority, the petitioner carried the matter by way of revision before the first respondent - Government on 15.03.2011 along with an application seeking to grant interim orders. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of his application in the revision petition for grant of interim orders, the same has not been taken up for consideration by the revisional authority and on the other hand, the respondents are taking steps to evict him from the land in question. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the date of purchase i.e. 10.07.1969, the petitioner is in uninterrupted possession of the aforesaid land, developed the same and using it for agricultural purpose. Whether transfer of aforesaid land is in violation of the aforesaid Regulation or not, is a matter, which is now seized before the revisional authority to consider the same. In view of pendency of the revision before the first respondent, it is not desirable for this Court to record any finding on merits. Be that as it may, as it is stated that since 1969, the petitioner is in continuous possession of the land in question and the revision, which is a remedy under the Regulation itself, is already availed by the petitioner by filing it on 15.03.2011, I deem it appropriate to direct the first respondent/revisional authority to dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, by giving an opportunity of hearing and advance notice to the petitioner. Further, there shall be a direction to the respondents that order, dated 21.08.1997, passed by the third respondent in LTR.Case.No.322/95/APT, as confirmed by the second respondent vide his order, dated 22.01.2011 passed in C.M.A.No.40 of 2007, shall remain suspended till the revision petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of by the first respondent and till such orders are communicated to him. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 7th APRIL, 2011. Note:issue c.c. in three (3) days. kvni