THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28193 of 2010 Date: 12.11.2010 Between: Giriprasad Reddy ..... PETITIONERS AND Joint Collector and others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Gopal G. Naik Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: Assst. Govt. Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28193 of 2010 Order: The short and simple grievance of the petitioner is that though he has succeeded in the appeal before respondent No.2, as a consequence of which, he is entitled for mutation of records in his favour, respondent No.3, by the impugned endorsement refused the petitioner’s request for mutation on the ground of pendency of revision before respondent No.1. At the hearing, Sri. Gopal G. Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that mere pendency of revision would not preclude respondent No.3 from altering the record of rights in pursuance of the appellate order passed in favour of his client. No doubt, technically, the learned counsel’s submission may be correct. But, to avoid future complications, it would be better if the dispute is settled between the parties once and for all before the entries in the revenue records are altered. In this view of the matter, respondent No.1 is directed to dispose of the revision filed by respondent No.4 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after hearing both the parties. Respondent No.3 shall take appropriate steps depending upon the result of the revision petition. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, W.P.M.P. No. 35958 of 2010 is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY,J DATE: 12th November, 2010 Note: Furnish c.c. in one week. B/o pnb