IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 28627 of 2008 Between: Komali Surya Rao S/o Sathi Raju Papampeta(V) Addateegala(M) E.G District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Govt of A.P Social Welfare (LTR-2) Department Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad Rep.by its Principal Secretary 2 The Additional Agent to the Government & Project Officer I.T.D.A Ramapachodavaram E.G District 3 The Special Deputy Collector Tribal Welfare Ramachodavaram E.G District 4 The Tahsildar Addathegala(M) Addathegala E.G District 5 Chalumarthi Ammanni W/o.Manga Reddy Pepampeta(V) Addateegla(M) E.G 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 to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Manadamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not passing orders in Revision petition and further declare the order of the 2nd respondent in C.MA No.129 of 2005 dt 2-12-2008 as highly illegal arbitrary unjust improper and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.BADANA.BHASKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.28627 of 2008 ORDER: 1 Initially fifth respondent filed LTRP No.41/2003 under the provisions of A.P. Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended by 1 of 1970 before the third respondent seeking ejectment of the petitioner from the land to an extent of Ac.5-50 cents in Sy.No.1/17 in Papempeta Village, Addateegala Mandal in East Godavari District and after due enquiry, the third respondent passed an order dated 22.07.2004 in favour of the petitioner holding that the possession of the petitioner over the said land is established by cogent documentary evidence such as Pattadar passbook, Adangals and other records and ultimately dismissed the said LTRP No.41 of 2003. Aggrieved thereby the fifth respondent carried the matter before the second respondent in C.M.A.No.129 of 2005, which was allowed on 02.12.2008. Assailing the same, the petitioner in this Writ Petition preferred a revision before the first respondent and along with the revision, the petitioner also filed an application seeking suspension of the order passed by the second respondent. However, as no orders have yet been passed on the said application, the petitioner approached this court and filed the present Writ Petition apprehending dispossession. 2 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare. 3 Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission as follows: 4 In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to dispose of the revision pending before it within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, pending disposal of the same, the order passed by the second respondent in CMA No.129 of 2005 dated 02.12.2008 shall remain suspended. No order as to costs. --------------------- SRI T.G.K, J. 29.12.2008 kvsn