HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.21718 of 2006 Dated:18.10.2006 Between: Sri Manorupa Meadows Pvt.Ltd. …Petitioners and District Collector and others. …Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.21718 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioner herein is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The Company purchased various extents of lands in Survey Nos.103/43/A, 103/43/AA and 103/50/AA totally admeasuring Acs.11.18 guntas situated at Shamshabad Village and Mandal in Ranga Reddy District. The third respondent herein initiated action under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’), and the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 1977, and issued a notice to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted explanation, but the Mandal Revenue Officer passed orders on 18.07.2006 ordering resumption of the land for contravention of the conditions of assignment as well as the provisions of the Act. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed appeal before the second respondent on 04.09.2006. The petitioner also moved an application for stay, which was rejected by the second respondent by notice/order, dated 20.09.2006. Be that as it is, as the appeal is still pending, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition seeking a direction to the second respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner against the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer dated 18.07.2006 expeditiously. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the notice/order, dated 20.09.2006, passed by the second respondent rejecting the request of the petitioner for grant of stay is illegal and arbitrary. This Court, however, cannot appreciate such a contention, because the petitioner has not specifically challenged the said order of the Revenue Divisional Officer. It only asked for the limited relief of directing the second respondent to dispose of the appeal. The same is not opposed. The Writ Petition is therefore, disposed of directing the second respondent to pass appropriate orders in the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of one week from today. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 18.10.2006 vs