IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 23488 of 2008 Between: Mohd. Ikramuddin S/o. Mohd. Naseeruddin R/o. H.No.14-22, Indira Gandhi Nagar, Opp. I.D.P.L. Colony, Bala Nagar, Hyderabad, A.P. ..... PETITIONER AND The Revenue Divisional Officer Peddapalli Karimnagar District & others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MOHD.ZIA-UL-HAQ Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 23488 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.1 in not granting stay of operation of the order dated 12-04-2006 passed by the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Sultanabad Mandal, Karimnagar District, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner also sought for a consequential direction to respondent No.1 to consider his request for stay of the said order. Heard Sri Mohd Zia-Ul-Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner applied to the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Sultanabad Mandal, Karimnagar District, for rectiﬁcation of the entries made in the revenue records. The said application was rejected by the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer by his order dated 12-04-2006. Questioning the said order, the petitioner ﬁled an appeal and the same is pending before respondent No.1. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he applied for stay of operation of the order of Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, respondent No.1 has not disposed of the same. I am not able to countenance the grievance of the petitioner in this regard, because when his application for correction of the revenue records is dismissed, no purpose will be served by staying the order of dismissal. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner appears to be illusory. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. However, having regard to the fact that the appeal ﬁled by the petitioner before respondent No.1 is pending for a long time, he is directed to dispose of the same within a period of eight weeks form the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.30597 of 2008 ﬁled by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. _________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:30-10-2008 usd