IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 22589 of 2008 Between: 1 Gosula Narasimha Rao, S/o. Yerraiah, R/o. Gundala Colony, Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam district. 2 Gosula Sreenu, S/o. Yerraiah, R/o. Gundala Colony, Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam district. 3 Godula Ramaiah, S/o. Kannaiah, R/o. Gundala Colony, Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam district. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Secretary, Tribunal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Additional Agent to Government of Project Officer, I.T.D.A. Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. 3 The Agency Divisional Officer, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. 4 The Tahsildar, Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam 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 a writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the stay petition or on the revision itself ﬁled on 22-9-2008 against the order of 2nd respondent dated 21-6-2008 in C.M.A. NO.4/2008 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider the dispose of the stay petition or the revision itself within a reasonable time and further direct the respondents, not to dispossess us from possession and enjoyment of the subject property in S.No.113/1, 113/2 and 113/1 measuring extent of Acs.19-00 Kts, Acs 2-07 Kts and 0-58 Kts respectively total measuring exteht of Acs.21-25 kts situated at Pinapally Village Bhadrachalam Madnal, Khammam District, pending disposal of the revision on the file of the 1st respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition has been ﬁled by the petitioners, who are three in number, assailing the action of the Tahsildar, Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam District in trying to dispossess them from the land bearing Sy.No. 113/1, 113/2 admeasuring Acs.21.25 guntas, pending disposal of the revision ﬁled by them. The petitioners claim to be in possession of Acs.21-25 guntas situated at Pinpally Village of Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam District. Proceedings have been initiated against the petitioners for ejectment on the ground that their occupation is in contravention of Andhra Pradesh Schedule Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959, as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970. The primary authority found that possession of the petitioners is in contravention of the Andhra Pradesh Schedule Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959, as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970. They ﬁled appeal being CMA No.4 of 2008. The appellate authority by order dated 21.6.2008 conﬁrmed the order passed by the primary authority. Against the order dated 21.6.2008, the petitioners ﬁled revision before the Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad-1st respondent. They also ﬁled application seeking stay of operation of the order passed by the appellate authority. Since the Tahsildar, Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam District-4th respondent is contemplating to dispossess them pending revision, they approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. When the writ petition came up for admission, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare received notice on behalf of R1 to R4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of R1 to R4. The factual aspect of ﬁling revision by the petitioner before the 1st respondent is not controverted by the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of R1 to R4. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the revision and pass appropriate orders. There shall be status quo existing as on this day with regard to possession of the land in dispute till the disposal of revision or stay application whichever is earlier. No costs. _________ 17-10-2008 rkk