IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THIS THE 29th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009 W.P.No.28174 of 2009 Between: Smt Yama Sarojini ... PETITIONER(S) and The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.28174 of 2009 ORDER: At the instance of the Special Deputy Tahsildar (Tribal Welfare) Bhadrachalam, proceedings were initiated before the Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), Bhadrachalam, the 3rd respondent, for restoration of land in Sy.No.32/AA of Padamata Narasapuram Village, Julurpad Mandal, Khammam District, admeasuring Acs.3-18 gts in favour of the 5th respondent by evicting the petitioner herein. The 3rd respondent passed an order dated 06.06.2006 directing eviction of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed CMA No.2 of 1007 before the Additional Agent to Government, Bhadrachalam, i.e. the 2nd respondent herein. The CMA was dismissed on 31.10.2009. Petitioner states that she filed a revision before the 1st respondent along with an application for suspension of the operation of the orders dated 06.06.2006 passed by the 3rd respondent and the orders dated 31.10.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent and complained that till date no orders are passed thereon. It is further complained that while the application for suspension of the operation of the orders dated 06.06.2006 passed by the 3rd respondent and the orders dated 31.10.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent is pending, respondents 4 and 5 are trying to evict her. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare. The petitioner suffered orders in the hands of respondents 2 and 3. It is stated that during pendency of the appeal before the 2nd respondent, an order of stay was granted and on the strength of the same she is continuing in possession of the land. If the petitioner is evicted, while the application for suspension of the operation of the orders dated 06.06.2006 passed by the 3rd respondent and the orders dated 31.10.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent is pending, nothing remains there to be decided. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of directing that the petitioner shall not be evicted till the 1st respondent passes orders on the application filed by her along with the revision against the orders of the 2nd respondent in CMA No.2 of 2007 dated 31.10.2007. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 29th December 2009 CVRK Note: Office to issue copy in three days. B/o CVRK