THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.16168 OF 2009 DATED: 07.08.2009 Between: Kalagara Vigneswara Rao .. Petitioner And The Special Commissioner, Office of the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Govt. of A.P., Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the official respondents. Petitioner claims that he is the owner and possessor of the land in an extent of 3.76 hectares in R.S.No.627 of Buttaigudem Village and Mandal, West Godavari District, having succeeded to the same from his father. It is the case of the petitioner that the said land originally belonged to erstwhile Gutala Zamin Estate, and that his father, who purchased the same during his lifetime, has also obtained ryotwari patta in respect of the said land, by order dated 27.07.1981 of the Settlement Officer, Eluru, after commencement of Andhra Pradesh (A.A) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948. Against the said order, an appeal lies before the Director of Settlements, within sixty days from the date of the order, but no appeal was preferred within that time, and, surprisingly, after a lapse of 22 years, the 4th respondent, who has no right whatsoever over the subject land, preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent- Commissioner and Director of Settlements, A.P., Hyderabad, challenging the said order dated 27.07.1981 of the Settlement Officer, even without any application for condonation of the abnormal delay caused in filing the said appeal. However, the 2nd respondent allowed the said appeal and cancelled the ryotwari patta issued in favour of the father of the petitioner, by order dated 08.11.2006. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent- Special Commissioner, Office of the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad, and the same was admitted on 30.11.2006 and status quo was ordered to be maintained till the disposal of the appeal. Now, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the said appeal is pending before the 1st respondent since more than two years, without any enquiry, and due to non-disposal of the said appeal, he is unable to cultivate the subject land. In the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, the 1st respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal purported to have been filed by the petitioner, against the order dated 08.11.2006 passed by the 2nd respondent, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 7th August, 2009. IBL