IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 28447 of 2007 Between: Koti Ramudu S/o.K.Vannurappa R/o. Potlamarri village, Bathapalli Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmavaram. 2 The Tahsildar, Bathalapalli. ...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 particulrly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting stay petition during pendency of the appeal Rc. No.2411/2007/B dated 26.12.2007 as illegal, arbitrary and also violative of provision of Act 9 of 1977 and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner in accordance with law and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR,KUNCHEAM MAHESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting stay petition during the pendency of the appeal Rc.No.2411/2007/B, dated 26.12.2007, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by him in accordance with law. It is the case of the petitioner that as against the orders dated 14.12.2007 passed by the 2nd respondent in R.C.No.229/2007(B) in resuming the lands of an extent of Ac.2.43 cents in Sy.No.152-5 situated at Bathalapalli village and mandal, Anantapur District, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent along with the stay application, but he rejected the said application by the impugned order dated 26.12.2007 in Rc.No.2412/2007/B. The petitioner questions the said impugned order in this writ petition. I am not inclined to express any opinion as to whether the land has been taken possession or not. However, if the appeal is pending as on today on the file of the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent may consider and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible and pending appeal, status-quo obtained as on today with regard to possession may be maintained. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:22.02.2008 Ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}