IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 14425 of 2010 Between: Namsani Mohan and others ..... PETITIONER AND The Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Karimnagar District at Karimnagar and others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 14425 OF 2010 O R D E R : The petitioners claim to be the absolute owners and possessors of different extents of land situated in Sy.Nos.791 and 934 of Peddapalli Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. It is stated that the 2nd respondent temple filed O.A.No.7 of 1994 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Warangal for eviction of the petitioners herein claiming that the said land belongs to the 2nd respondent temple. The said O.A. was allowed by order dated 16.1.2003. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed Revision Petition No.20 of 2003 on the file of the Regional Joint Commissioner, Endowments Department, Hyderabad, under Section 92 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 and the same was allowed by order dated 25.5.2004 thereby setting aside the eviction order dated 16.1.2003. The said order became final and the petitioners have been continuing in possession. While so, the 2nd respondent filed a Claim Petition before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddapalli for grant of Occupancy Right Certificates under A.P. (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act in respect of the lands in possession of the petitioners. Though the petitioners filed counters stating that the lands covered by Sy.No.791 and 934 are patta lands, the Revenue Divisional Officer had erroneously granted Occupancy Right Certificates in favour of the 2nd respondent by order dated 21.01.2009. Challenging the said order, the petitioners preferred an Appeal before the 3rd respondent - Joint Collector, Karimnagar – under Section 158 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, along with an application for stay. Alleging that the 3rd respondent failed to consider the appeal of the petitioners, particularly the application for stay and in the meanwhile the 2nd respondent has been taking steps to dispossess the petitioners, the present writ petition has been filed. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The material available on record shows that the appeal of the petitioners was registered as Appeal No.F1/17/2009 on the file of the 3rd respondent on 23.5.2009. As the petitioners claim to be in continuous possession of the land in question for the past several years and they are apprehending dispossession pursuant to the order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 21.1.2009, it is necessary for the 3rd respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for stay expeditiously. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the application for stay filed by the petitioners in their Appeal No.F1/17/2009 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. ​ ____________ Date: 23.06.2010 G. ROHINI, J Ivd