IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.25218 of 2008 Between: Pedagoundla Suryanarayana S/o. Chandraiah R/o. Kishtaram Village, Sathupalli Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Revenue Divisional Officer, Khammam, Khammam District. 2 Joint Collector, Khammam, Khammam District. 3 Pedagoundla Lakshmi W/o. Late P. Venkaiah R/o. Sathupalli (V) & (M), 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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent in not disposing of the Revision Petition No.8/2007 against the orders of the 1st respondent in Rc.A1/1788/2006 dated 20.05.2007 ﬁled by the petitioner in respect of land in S.No.39/66 to an extent of 0.37 cents and in S.No.39/67 to an extent of 0.30 cents totaling to 0.67 cents situated at Kishtaram Village, Sathupalli Mandal, Khammam District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and pass such other order or orders as may deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V.V.PRABHAKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.25218 of 2008 ORDER: Aggrieved by the order of the ﬁrst respondent dated 20.05.2007 in Rc.No.A1/1788/06 the petitioner ﬁled a revision under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, before the second respondent. Alleging that the revision petition, being RP.No.8 of 2007, remained undisposed of even after one year, the present writ petition is ﬁled seeking appropriate direction to the second respondent for expeditious disposal of the revision. After getting instructions, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General – TA) submits that a notice was issued to the petitioner to appear before the second respondent and as he did not appear a paper publication was given. In spite of the same, petitioner did not appear before the second respondent, and therefore, the revision could not be disposed of. Liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the second respondent with a copy of this order. In this writ petition, however, no relief can be granted. The Writ Petition is dismissed accordingly. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 18.11.2008 vs To 1 Revenue Divisional Officer, Khammam, Khammam District. 2 Joint Collector, Khammam, Khammam District. 3 2CCs to G.P for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}