IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED WRIT PETITION NO : 22130 of 2008 Between: 1.Gollapalli Bujjamma W/o. Venkateswarlu R/o. Rallapadu Village, Lingasamudram Mandal, Prakasam District. 2.Maddela Ademma W/o. Ramulu R/o. Rallapadu Village, Lingasamudram Mandal, Prakasam District. 3.Gollapalli China Kotaiah S/o. Narayana R/o. Rallapadu Village, Lingasamudram Mandal, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1.The Government of A.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Revenue Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2.The Commissioner, Appeals, Office of the Chief Commissioner Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad. 3.Joint Collector, Prakasam District, Ongole. 4.Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur Division, Kandukur, Prakasam District. 5.The Madnal Revenue Officer, PResently Tahsildar, Lingasamudram (M), Prakasam 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 1st respondent in not passing stay order on the stay petition and pending revision petition presented against order dt. 29-8-2008 in CCLA's Proceedings No. BCW1/61/2008 passed by the 2nd respondent as illegal, irregular, and contrary to provisions of A.P. Board of Revenue Standing Orders and oﬀends Art: 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands pursuant to said order. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The court made the following order: THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED Writ Petition No.22130 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking to issue a Writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the ﬁrst respondent in not passing any orders on the stay petition ﬁled along with the revision presented against the order, dated 29.08.2008, in CCLA’s Proceedings No.BCW1/61/2008, passed by the second respondent, as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Board of Revenue Standing Orders and Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands in question, pending the revision. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. Inasmuch as the revision ﬁled by the petitioners is pending on the ﬁle of the ﬁrst respondent and this writ petition is ﬁled only aggrieved by non-granting of stay pending the revision, ends of justice would meet, if a direction is given to dispose of the main revision itself. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the ﬁrst respondent-revisional authority to dispose of the revision stated to have been ﬁled by the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained with regard to the lands in question. No costs. _________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Dt.06.10.2008 Note: Communicate the operative portion by wire at party’s costs. (b/o) NRG/VGB