IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 19644 of 2008 Between: 1 Vadla @ Kosuganti Veeraiah S/o Lachaiah R/o. Metapalli Village & Mandal, Karimnagar District. 2 Vadla @ Kosuganti Laxman S/o. Rajaiah R/o. Metapalli Village & Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Joint Collector, Karimnagar. 2 Mukka Shantamma W/o. Kanthaiah R/o. Metapalli Village & Mandal, Karimnagar District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Jagital, 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 grant an Order, Direction or Writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not ﬁxing the date of hearing in revision ﬁle No.D1/3808/2007 for early disposal as bad, arbitrary, illegal apart from the same being opposed to principles of natural justice and fair trail and to set aside the same consequently directing the 1st respondent to ﬁx up the date of hearing the revision and be pleased to pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.RAMESH SAGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following Order: The petitioners state that as against the order of the third respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Jagital, dated 30-07-2007, in directing the Tahasildar, Metpalli, to delete the name of the second respondent and incorporate their names in the pattadar passbooks and title deeds, the second respondent preferred a revision to the ﬁrst respondent-Joint Collector, Karimnagar, who by order dated 01-09-2007 stayed the order of the third respondent. The grievance of the petitioners is that though a year has elapsed since the date of ﬁling of the revision, the ﬁrst respondent-Joint Collector has not ﬁxed the date of hearing of the revision. Hence the writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and at their request, the writ petition itself is being disposed of. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submitted that as the ﬁrst respondent-Joint Collector has already ﬁxed the date of hearing of the revision on 27-09-2008, no orders are necessary in the present writ petition. Recording the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Revenue that the date of hearing of the revision was fixed on 27-09-2008, the writ petition is closed. _________________ N.V.RAMANA,J Dt:22-09-2008 usd To 1 The Joint Collector, Karimnagar. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Jagital, Karimnagar District. 3 Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 4 Two CD copies.