IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No. 20832 of 2008 Between: Smt. L. Shobha W/o. Vittal Reddy R/o. Gowrelly Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, at Hyderabad. 2 The Special Grade Deputy Collector-Cum- Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy District, East Division, Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Collector & Mandal Revenue Officer, Hayathnagar Mandal Ranga Reddy 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 to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not considering the Revision petition and not passing any interim orders in the interlocutory application for interim suspension of the orders passed by the 2nd Respondent which was ﬁled by the petitioner in the Revision Petition dt. 18-9-2008 against the Orders passed by the 2nd Respondent, dt. 1-9-2008 in File No. 2167/2007 despite the urgency, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 1st respondent to pass interim orders in the Revision petition by protecting the possession of the petitioner till the disposal of the main Revision and to pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KANAKAMEDALA RAVINDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following Order: The petitioner states that as against the proceedings dated 01-09-2008 of the second respondent-Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Ranga Reddy District, he preferred an appeal along with stay application before the ﬁrst respondent-Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District. The grievance of the petitioner is that the ﬁrst respondent-Joint Collector, has not passed any orders, and pending disposal of the said appeal, the respondents are trying to dispossess him. Hence the writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. Both the counsel agreed to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: The ﬁrst respondent-Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, is directed to consider and dispose of either the appeal or the stay application, ﬁled by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. Till then, status quo obtaining an on today shall be maintained by the parties. No order as to costs. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ N.V.RAMANA,J Dt:24-09-2008 Note:Wire at party’s cost. bo usd To 1 The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, at Hyderabad. 2 The Special Grade Deputy Collector-Cum- Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy District, East Division, Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Collector & Mandal Revenue Officer, Hayathnagar Mandal Ranga Reddy District.