HON’BLE SHRI G.S. SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE WRIT PETITION No. 11661 OF 1996 Between: Penumarthi Munaiah ……Petitioner And Revenue Divisional Officer- Land Reforms Tribunal, Adoni, Kurnool District ……Respondent :: ORDER :: Counsel for the petitioner : R. Thimma Reddy Counsel for the Respondent : Government Pleader for Revenue Dated: 12-04-2006 In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for restraining Revenue Divisional Officer, Land Reforms Tribunal, Adoni, Kurnool District and his staff from dispossessing him from his own land. In the affidavit filed by him, the petitioner has averred that Writ Petition No.10848 of 1989 filed him questioning proceedings initiated under the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short ‘the Act’) has been admitted and further proceedings have been stayed. He has further averred that despite interim order passed by the High Court, the respondent and his staff are seeking to dispossess him from the land. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In my opinion, it is impossible to construct a rational order because the writ petition is devoid of all basic particulars. I cannot, however, resist the temptation of admiring the persuasive force of arguments of the learned counsel, who could persuade the admission Bench to issue the rule and pass an order of stay despite the fact that in W.P.M.P No.14394 of 1989 filed with Writ Petition No.10848 of 1989 wherein the petitioner had questioned the proceedings initiated under the Act, another learned Single Judge had already granted wholesome stay including the one against the dispossession of the petitioner from the land described in that petition. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner came out with a soft solution. He prayed that his client may be permitted to withdraw the petition. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. G.S. SINGHVI, CJ 12-04-2006 ks/vtv