IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 28382 of 2007 Between: 1 A.Satyanarayana S/o.A.Ramakrishna Rao R/o.Patamata,Vijayawada town Krishna District 2 Smt.Katuri Prameela Rani W/o.Venkateswara Rao R/o.Kanur village Penamuluru mandal Krishna District 3 Smt.D.V.Narasamma W/o. Venkata Subba Rao R/o.D.No.19-2-7, Rajarajeswaripeta Vijayawada-1 Krishna District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue (UC) Department , Government of Andhra pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Special Officer & Competent Authority, Urban land Ceilings, Arandal complex, Governorpet, Vijayawada Krishna 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 issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pass orders on the revision petition filed by the petitioners U/s. 34 of Urban Land Ceilings Act, by taking into consideration the report of the 2nd respondent dated 25.6.2006 as per the Memo No.24086/UC/III/2/2006-1 dated 12.6.2006 in the interest of justice and consequential directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the land bearing Sy.No.337/1 B2 362/1C totally admeasuring Ac.4.68 cents and Sy.No.394/2B 1A admeasuring Ac.0.80 cents situated at Gollapudi village, Vijayawada rural, Krishna District without due process of law. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.E.MADAN MOHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The petitioners case is that they have preferred a revision under Section 34 of the Urban Land Ceiling Act before the 1st respondent and after filing the revision petition, the 1st respondent directed the Special Officer – 2nd respondent to send a report. On 25.6.2006 the 2nd respondent has forwarded his report recommending for exemption of the land from the ceiling but so far no orders have been passed by the 1st respondent. On 31.12.2007, the writ petition was admitted and notice was issued to the respondents. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader submits that the 2nd respondent has sent a report to the 1st respondent and the matter is still pending consideration before the 1st respondent. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader submits that a direction be given to the 1st respondent to dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioners after taking into consideration the report submitted by the 2nd respondent, as expeditiously as possible. Till then, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.14.3.2008 msv