IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 26485 of 2008 Between: Marrie. Lalitha Kumari, D/o. Marrie Kamalamma, in Sri Potti Sri Ramulu Telugu University, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P. Rep by its Principal Secretary to Government, Social Welfare (CV.1) Department, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector and Magistrate, Nalgonda District. 3 The Joint Collector & Chairman, The Scrutiny Committee at District Level, Nalgonda District. 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kodada Mandal, Nalgonda 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 issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the first respondent in Memo No. 7957/C.V-1/2007-1, dated 01-10-2008, refusing to grant stay of the proceedings of the second respondent District Collector, Nalgonda District, in No. H7/12465/2006-1, dated 16-8-2008, pending the Appeal before him is illegal, violating the fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution of India, and against the principles of natural justice, and consequently to set aside the order passed by the Second respondent in No. H7/12465/2006-1, dated 16-8-2008. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.SATYANARAYANA MOORTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the order dated 1.10.2008 passed by the 1st respondent-Government refusing to grant stay of the Proceedings dated 16.8.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent, as arbitrary and illegal. The main grievance of the petitioner is that when she preferred an Appeal along with an application for stay before the 1st respondent- Government, against the order dated 16.8.2008 passed by the 2nd respondent-District Collector and Magistrate, the 1st respondent, by its order 1.10.2008, rejected the stay application pending disposal of the Appeal. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following direction: “The 1st respondent-Government is hereby directed to dispose of the appeal within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to observe that before the appeal is decided, the petitioner shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard. Till the disposal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, the order dated 16.8.2008 passed by the 2nd respondent-District Collector and Magistrate is hereby suspended. In terms of the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ 04.12.2008 Note: Furnish copy by Monday B/o bcj