IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 12699 of 2009 Between: Asadi Pedda Kullayappa W/o.Asadi Pedda Linganna R/o.Namala Village, H/o.Pydindi, C.K.Palli Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Land Revenue, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 3 The Joint Collector, Anantapur. 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, C.K.Palli, Anantapur District. 5 Asadi Venkatesu S/o.Yellappa R/o.Namala Village, H/o.Pydindi, C.K.Palli Mandal, Anantapur 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 an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in not passing orders on the petitioner's stay petition nor appeal filed against the orders of the 3rd respondent vide proceedings Rc.No.1032/95/A6 dated 10.04.1995 on the file of Joint Collector & Additional District Magistrate, Anantapur, as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1st respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's stay application and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.N.ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.NO.12699 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER The Joint Collector, Anantapur by a proceeding dated 10.04.1995 directed resumption of land of an extent of Ac.2.58 cents in Sy.No.389/2 of Pydindi village, C.K.Palli Mandal, which was assigned to the petitioner, on the ground that he violated the conditions of assignment. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner represented to the 2nd respondent who by an order dated.14.06.1995 set aside the Joint Collector’s order dated.10.04.1995. Aggrieved thereby, the 5th respondent filed a W.P.No.15354 of 1995. By the judgment dated.09-06-2005 the said writ petition was allowed and the order of the Collector dated.14-06-1995 was set aside leaving it open to the contesting respondent therein namely the petitioner herein to pursue his remedies against the order of the Joint Collector dated.10.04.1995. Nearly four (4) years after the disposal of that writ petition, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the 1st respondent against the order of the Joint Collector dated.10.04.1995 and along therewith an application for interim stay of the said order. Aggrieved that the 1st respondent has neither disposed of the application nor the application for interim relief, the writ petition is filed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Assignment. The 1st respondent before whom the petitioner has preferred an appeal dated.19-02-2009 against the order of the 3rd respondent dated.10-04-1995 shall expeditiously dispose of the appeal or the petitioner’s application for interim relief, preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. _________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 1st JULY 2009 *TSNR