HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.16350 of 2008 Date: July 29, 2011 Between: Annepu Himavanatha Rao, S/o. Satyanarayana, aged about 32 years, R/o.H.No.240, R.S.No.478 of Laxminarasimhapuram Village, Nandiwada Mandal, Krishna Distirct, and another … Petitioners And The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudiwada, Krishna District and others … Respondents Order: In view of the pendency of the appeal filed by the petitioners before the 1st respondent under the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905, writ petition itself is disposed of although miscellaneous petitions are listed for hearing. Petitioners seek a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudiwada, Krishna District, in not passing any orders on the appeal filed by them under Section 10(2) of the A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short, ‘the Act’) against the notice dated 16.07.2008, issued by the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, Nandiwada Mandal, under Section 6 of the Act. Petitioners claim that they have been in possession of land admeasuring Ac.0.02 cents of PWD Bund Poramboke in Sy.No.478 of Ellaparru village, Nandiwada Mandal, for the last more than 30 years, where they have constructed a thatched house. With regard to the said land, respondents have initiated proceedings and issued notice dated 16.07.2008 under Section 6 of the Act. It is stated that challenging the said notice, petitioners filed an appeal before the 1st respondent-appellate authority. On the ground that the 1st respondent authority did not consider their request for grant of interim stay, they approached this Court by this writ petition. At the stage of admission, by order dated 29.07.2008, this Court passed interim order preventing the respondents from taking steps for eviction of the petitioners from the land in question. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed counter-affidavit denying the allegations of the petitioners. In the counter-affidavit, it is admitted that the petitioner has filed an appeal against the notice dated 16.07.2008 and it is stated that the all the disputed questions of facts that have been raised by the petitioners in the appeal are to be considered and the appeal is to be disposed of. In view of the fact that the appeal filed by the petitioners against the notice dated 16.07.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar is pending before the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, who is the appellate authority, and as this Court has passed interim order on 29.07.2008, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners against the notice dated 16.07.2008, if not already disposed of, within three months from today. Interim order of this Court dated 29.07.2008 shall continue till appropriate orders are passed on the appeal of the petitioners. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) July 29, 2011 MRR