IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3870 of 2008 Between: Sri Pagidipati Raghava Reddy S/o. Biksha Reddy R/o. Ramakrishnapuram ( V ), Dummugudem ( M ), Khamma District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Agwent to Government Project Officer, I.T.D.A. ( Social Welfare ), Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Dummugudem ( V ) & ( M ) Khammam District 3 Mandarapu Smt KAmal kshamma, W/o. Veeraju Dummugudem ( V ) & ( M ), Khamma District. 4 The Sub Collector & The Agency Divisional Officer, Bhadrachalam, Khamma District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 toissue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particular in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more paticularly respondent No.1 in not disposing of the appeal in L.T.R. Case No.325/2007 is illegal, arbitrary, and opposed to Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.H.SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following Order: The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of the land to an extent of Ac.6.37 ½ cents, Ac. 5.97 cents, Ac.2.25 cents covered by Sy.Nos. 15/2P, 15/3 and 15/3 respectively of Maredubaka village Dummugudem mandal, Khammam District. It is stated that the said land was purchased by the petitioner from its previous owner, a non-tribal, on 10-1-1968. It is the case of the petitioner that though the enforcement of prohibition for transfer of lands belonging to tribals under the A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1/1959 came into force with effect from 3-2-1970 by way of amendment by Regulation 1/70, but however, without giving any opportunity and without recording any finding, the Agency divisional Officer, Sub-Collector, Bhadrachalam has passed order of eviction dated 14-9-2007 in LTR Case No.24/DGM/2007. It is further submitted that as against the said order of the primary authority, the petitioner preferred appeal being LTR Appeal No.325 of 2007 on 2-11-2007 as contemplated under said Regulation, and the same is pending consideration. On the ground that in spite of the appeal filed by the petitioner, no orders have been passed and on the other hand, respondents are taking steps for eviction of the petitioner, he has come up with this Writ Petition. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. Though it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had purchased the aforesaid land in the year 1968 and the same is not in violation of the A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1/1959, as amended by Regulation 1/1970, but however, in view of the pendency of the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of eviction dated 14-09-2007, it is not desirable to record any finding on the grounds of appeal. As much as it is stated that the petitioner had purchased the said land in the year 1968 and since then he is in continuous and uninterrupted possession and, the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending consideration, I dispose of the Writ Petition directing the first respondent-appellate authority to dispose of the appeal being LTR.No. 325 of 2007 filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, by giving opportunity to him. Till the disposal of the said appeal, the order dated 14-09-2007 passed by the fourth respondent shall remain suspended and there shall be a further direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to be in possession of the subject land, pending disposal of the appeal and communication of the order on appeal to be passed by the appellate authority. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No order as to costs. ---------------------------------- JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY DATE: 26-02-2008 Msnr.