IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 21441 of 2008 Between: Mesa Laxminarayana S/o.M.narayana Presently R/o.7-1-246/2/A/85 Renuka Nagar Balkampet, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND The Spl.Grade Dy. Collector, & Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Divison, Ranga Reddy District .....RESPONDENT 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not passing orders in IA.No. of 2008 ﬁled on 26.3.2008 by the petitioner in C/796/2007 dated 25.2.2008 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to pass orders in I.A.No. of 2008 filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.KUNCHEAMMAHESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : Order: This writ petition is ﬁled by the petitioner stating that aggrieved by the orders dated 15.10.2005 passed by the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, he ﬁled an appeal before the Special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, the respondent herein and on 22.9.2007, on which date the case was posted, his counsel could not attend the case and as such ex parte orders were passed on 25.2.2008. After receiving the said orders, it is stated that the petitioner ﬁled an interlocutory application seeking to set aside the ex parte orders and for restoration of the case. The grievance of the petitioners is that so far no orders are passed in the interlocutory application. Hence this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and at their request the matter is taken up for ﬁnal disposal at the admission stage. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that since the interlocutory application ﬁled by the petitioner is still pending consideration before the respondent, in stead of this Court going into the merits of the matter, the respondent may be directed to dispose of the application, for which course of action, the learned counsel for the petitioner also agreed. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and dispose of the application ﬁled by the petitioner seeking to set aside the ex parte orders and to restore the case to ﬁle as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.29.9.2008 msv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}