THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.52 of 2006 Dated:03.01.2006 Between: Smt.Rahna Begum, W/o.Mohammed karamtullah, Aged about 52 years, resident of Door No.9-151, Mastam Bazar, Vuyyuru, Krishna District, another. ..... PETITIONER AND Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By Its Secretary, Revenue Department (Urban Ceiling) Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.52 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioners are daughters of one Shaik Ameer Saheb, who appears to have filed a declaration being C.C.No.2290 of 1976 under Section 6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (‘the Act’ for brevity) before the second respondent. After processing the same, the father of the petitioners was declared to be surplus landholder to an extent of 1622 square metres. The petitioners came to know that though they are entitled to a share in the property, their father did not claim any share to them and accordingly made a representation to the second respondent, in vain. They therefore, filed W.P.No.3448 of 2005 before this Court seeking a writ of mandamus impeaching the inaction of the second respondent. In the meanwhile, on 03.02.2005, the second respondent disposed of the representation of the petitioners rejecting the claim. Therefore, on 14.06.2005, this Court disposed of the writ petition giving liberty to the petitioners to question the same before the appropriate Forum. Accordingly, the petitioners filed a revision petition under Section 34 of the Act, which was returned on 08.09.2005. The petitioners re-presented the same and as no orders are passed, the present writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to dispose of the revision petition expeditiously. After obtaining the necessary instructions, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Urban Land Ceiling) submits that the revision petition submitted/re-presented by the petitioners – is not traceable in the Office. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioners has placed before this Court the original Courier consignment note evidencing the receipt of the cover sent by the first petitioner addressed to the Principal Secretary to Government in Revenue Department, Hyderabad. Be that as it is, as the revision petition sent by the petitioners is not traceable in the Revenue Department, liberty is given to the petitioners to submit a copy of the revision petition along with all the documents to the first respondent. After receiving the same, the first respondent may dispose of the revision petition within a period of eight weeks after that date. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 03.01.2006 vs