IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 23289 of 2008 Between: K.Paneer Selvan S/o.Kanda Swamy Proprietor of M/s. Narmada Enterprises, H.No.7/4, 8th Street, nandanam Extension, Chennai, rep. by his General Power of Attorney R.Sundara Murthy S/o.Ramachandram, Age37 Yrs. R/o.Kazipet, Warangal Dt. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Suryapet, Nalgonda District. 2 The Tahsildar, Kodad Mandal, Nalgonda District. 3 Mali Madhusudhan Reddy S/o.Joga Reddy Flat No.C-204, Siddamsetti Towers, Jawahar Nagar, Hyderabad. 4 Nerellapalli Krishna Reddy S/o.Raji Reddy Flat No. 401, H.No. 3-5-574, Vittalwadi, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad. .....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 Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not disposing of the appeal bearing No.G/221/2008 preferred under Section 5(5) of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, and pass such other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.J.VENKATESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1&2: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the proprietor of M/s.Narmada Enterprises. It is stated that he purchased the land containing hillock admeasuring Ac.8.34 guntas in Sy.No.363 of Gondriyala Village, Kodad Mandal, Nalgonda District from its original owner through registered sale deed. Thereafter, he was waiting for an opportunity to start the granite business in the said land as the same contains granite deposits. While so, the 3rd respondent created documents as if the petitioner sold the said land to him by forging his signature and presented the same before the District Registrar, Nalgonda for collection of deﬁcit stamp duty and penalty and after collecting the same, the District Registrar issued a certiﬁcate under Section 42 of the Indian Stamp Duty Act on 19.6.2007. Thereafter, the 4 th respondent appears to have submitted an application before the 2nd respondent for issuance of pattadar pass book and title deeds in respect of the said land. On coming to know that, the petitioner is stated to have made an application to the 2nd respondent on 26.9.2007 inter alia objecting for issuance of pattadar pass books and title deeds on the ground that he is the owner of the said land having purchased the same from its original owners on 19.7.1989 and that the 4th respondent has forged the documents. While the matters stood thus, the 4th respondent is stated to have made an application to the authorities seeking grant of mining lease. It is stated that the petitioner has also submitted his objections for the said application before the authorities. As an abundant caution, he also ﬁled Writ Petition No.24640 of 2007 before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents not to grant mining lease without considering his representations dated 26.9.2007 and 30.10.2007. However, on 5.9.2007, respondents 3 and 4 have granted pattadar pass books in favour of the 4th respondent and consequently, the 2 nd respondent has also issued no objection certiﬁcate in favour of the 4th respondent for mining lease. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner ﬁled an appeal before the 1st respondent under Section 5(5) of the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act,1971 (for short ‘the Act’). The grievance of the petitioner is that the said appeal though is entertained, the 1st respondent is not taking any steps for disposal of the same and on the other hand, the 4th respondent is trying to get mining lease on the basis of the proceedings of the 2nd respondent. Hence this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and at their request the writ petition is taken up for ﬁnal disposal at the admission stage. The learned Government Pleader submits that since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent against the orders of the 2nd respondent granting pattadar pass books to the 4th respondent and the same is still pending, instead of this Court going into the merits of the matter, the 1st respondent may be directed to dispose of the appeal itself, for which course of action, the petitioner has also agreed. In the circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the appeal iled by the petitioner under Section 5(5) of the Act as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.24.10.2008 msv