IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 16858 of 2009 Between: Ijjina Prabhakara Rao S/oa. Late China Venkanna R/o. Indukuru Village, Devipatnam Mandal, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Agent to the Government Rampachodavaram East Godavari District. 2 The Agency Divisional Officer Rampachodavaram, E.G. District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer Devipatnam Mandal, E.G. District. 4 The Special Deputy Tahsildar Tribal Welfare, Devipatnam Mandal, East Godavari District.' 5 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Prl, Secretary Social Welfare (LTR.1) Department Secretariat at 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 appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondents in taking steps to dispossess the petitioner from his lands to extent Hec. 0.68 (Ac 1.70) of land in Sy.No. 367 & 409 situated at Indukuru Village, Devipatnam Mandal, East Godavari District in pursuance of the order passed by the 1st respondent in CMA No. 24/2007 dt. 6-4-2009 as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the above mentioned land pending disposal of the revision filed before the 5th Respondent in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.16858 of 2009 Order: The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of land to an extent of Hec.0.68 (Acs.1.70 cents) situated in Survey Nos.367 and 409 of Indukuru Village, Devipatnam Mandal, East Godavari District. It is the case of the petitioner that at the instance of the fourth respondent, the second respondent initiated proceedings under Section 3(1) of A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulations, 1959 and through his orders, dated 22.10.2007, ordered eviction of the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner claims to have filed C.M.A., before the Additional Agent to Government, Rampachodavaram, the first respondent, who in turn dismissed the C.M.A., through his orders dated 06.04.2009, confirming the orders of the second respondent. Thereupon, the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the fifth respondent-Government along with an application seeking stay. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his revision petition has not been considered so far and no orders have been passed even on his application for stay. In the meanwhile, since there is threat of dispossession, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondents Since the statutory revision is pending before the fifth respondent, it would be appropriate to protect the possession of the petitioner till the revision petition is disposed of in accordance with law. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, with a direction to the fifth respondent-Government to dispose of the revision petition preferred by the petitioner, expeditiously. Till the disposal of the revision petition by the fifth respondent, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by both the parties. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:17.08.2009 VGB