IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 25538 of 2008 Between: Smt.Mutta Janakiramanamma W/o.Venkateswara Rao R/o.Seethanagaram Village, Chintalapudi Mandal, W.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, W.G. District, Eluru. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, W.G. District, Eluru. 3 The Tahsildar, Chintalapudi, W.G. District. 4 Smt.Dudigam Kanthamma W/o.China Lingaiah R/o.Chintalapudi Village, Chintalapudi Mandal, W.G. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 or order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent not passing any orders either in Revision Petition or in Stay Petition dated 31-10-2008 which was against the order dated 20.10.2008 of the 2nd respondent in proceedings R.O.C.No.1492 of 2008 directing the 3rd respondent to restore the land of Ac.3.29 cents in R.S.No.170/1 situated at Chitampally (V) to the 4th respondent, is illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and offends Article 300-A of Constitution of India and consequentially directing the respondents not to dispossess petitioner from the above mentioned land. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. SITA RAM CHAPARLA Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.25538 OF 2008 ORDER : The petitioner herein was granted a D-Form patta in respect of Ac.3.29 cents of land situated in RS.No.170 of 2001 of Chitampally Village, Chintalapudi Mandal, West Godavari District. However, the 2nd respondent - Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District – vide proceedings dated 20.10.2008 cancelled the said patta and directed to restore the same to the 4th respondent herein holding that she was the original assignee. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a Revision before the 1st respondent – Joint Collector, Eluru, W.G. District - on 31.10.2008 along with an application for stay. However, the 1st respondent failed to consider and no order has been passed so far. In the meanwhile, pursuant to the 2nd respondent’s order steps are being taken to dispossess the petitioner. Hence, the present writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the 1st respondent in not passing any orders either on the Revision or in the stay petition dated 31.10.2008 as arbitrary and illegal. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. Since the Revision Petition is pending before the 1st respondent, it is neither necessary nor proper for this Court to express any opinion as to the correctness of the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 20.10.2008. However, having regard to the apprehension of dispossession expressed by the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to protect the petitioner’s possession till appropriate orders are passed by the 1st respondent. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the stay petition or the Revision Petition preferred by the petitioner against the order of the 2nd respondent dated 20.10.2008 as expeditiously as possible following due process of law. Till such time, there shall be interim stay of dispossession of the petitioner from the land in question pursuant to the order of the 2nd respondent, dated 20.06.2008. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 24.11.2008 gbs