IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 12001 of 2008 Between: 1 Bangari Ramesh, S/o. late chinna Gangaram, R/o.Koratla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 2 Bangari Raju, W/o. late nadipi Gangaram, R/o.Koratla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 3 Maggidi. Mallavva, W/o. late Maggidi Chinnaiah, R/o.Koratla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 4 Chityala. Malkaiah, S/o. Gangaram, R/o.Koratla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 5 Kathula Pochaiah, S/o. Bheema Lingaiah, R/o.Koratla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 6 Bangari Potha Lingaiah, S/o. Bheema Lingaiah, R/o.Koratla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 7 Maggidi Nadipi Gangaram, S/o. late Ashanna, R/o.Koratla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 8 Bangari Ashanna, S/o. Pathaiah, R/o.Koratla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, (RDO), Jagtial Division, Jagtial, Karimnagar District. 2 The Tahsildar, Koratla Mandal, Koratla, Karimnagar District. 3 The Village Revenue Officer, Koratla, Karimnagar District. ...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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the respondents No.1 in not passing any orders in the stay petition filed by the petitioner in appeal No.A/592/2008 which is preferred aggrieved by the orders passed by the respondent No.2 in B/94/2008 dated 19-3-2008, even though the said appeal was filed on 8-4-2008, as arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of the Articles 14, 19 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the land assigned to their ancestors in which they are in possession in survey No.1252 situated at Koratla proper and Mandal, karimnagar District until the disposal of the Appeal No.A/592/2008 on the file of the respondent No.1. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: It is the case of the petitioners that their ancestors were the assignees of the land in Sy.No.1252 in an extent of Ac.0.23 guntas each under Laoni Rules vide G.O.Ms.No.1406 dated 25.7.2008 and G.O.Ms.No.172 dated 26.8.1959 and since then the lands have been cultivated and that is their only source of livelihood. While so, the 2nd respondent – Tahsildar, Koratla Mandal without looking into the facts of the case and without giving any opportunity of hearing passed orders on 19.3.2008 directing the 3rd respondent – Village Revenue Officer to take possession of the assigned land. Aggrieved by the said order, it is stated that the petitioners preferred statutory appeal before the 1st respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Jagtial Division under Section 4-A of the A.P.Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 on 8.4.2008 along with an application to suspend the operation of the order and to direct respondents 2 and 3 not to dispossess them until the disposal of the appeal. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the appeal is filed on 8.4.2008, the 1st respondent has not given any date for hearing the appeal nor passed any orders on the stay petition. Hence this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners 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 itself. Admittedly, the appeal preferred by the petitioners against the orders passed by the 2nd respondent is still pending consideration before the 1st respondent and no orders are passed either in the appeal or on the stay petition. If the order of the 2nd respondent is not stayed during the pendency of the appeal, the whole cause will become infructuous. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners against the orders of the 2nd respondent expeditiously and till then the order dated 19.3.2008 passed by the 2nd respondent shall remain stayed. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.12.6.2008 msv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, (RDO), Jagtial Division, Jagtial, Karimnagar District. 2 The Tahsildar, Koratla Mandal, Koratla, Karimnagar District. 3 The Village Revenue Officer, Koratla, Karimnagar District. 4 2CCs to Govt.Pleader for Revenue, High Court of A.P. Hyd 5 2CD copies