IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 23874 of 2008 Between: L.Anasuya, W/o. late L.Rajeswar Goud, R/o. Flat No.207, Kanthisikhara Apartments, Panjagutta, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND The Tahsildar (MRO), Shankarampet Mandal, Medak District. .....RESPONDENT 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 in not taking any steps on the application made by the petitioner on 06-07-2008 to make an entry in the revenue records and issue pattedar pass books of the land purchased by my husband in Sy.No.18A to an extent of Ac.7.00 cents situated at Tirumalapuram Village, Shankarampet Mandal as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.V.RAGHU VEER Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled by the petitioner stating that her husband, during his life time, purchased an extent of Ac.8.00 of land in Sy.No.18A at Tirumalapuram Village, Shankarampet Mandal in the year 1983 and pattadar pass books were also issued by the then Tahsidlar in respect of the said land and his name was also entered in the revenue records and since then they were in possession and enjoyment of the said lands. While so, her husband expired on 10.9.1998 leaving behind herself and her children as his legal heirs but they did not take any steps to change their names in the revenue records. On 6.7.2008 she made an application to the respondent – Tahsildar, Shankerampet Mandal for changing her name in the revenue records. The grievance of the petitioner is that so far no action has been taken on her representation by the respondent and hence she ﬁled this writ petition seeking appropriate directions to the respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and at their request the writ petition is taken up for ﬁnal disposal at the admission stage. Since the petitioner has already made an application to the respondent Tahsildar seeking mutation of her name in the revenue records and the same is still pending, without going into the merits of the matter, the respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the said representation in accordance with law expeditiously. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.3.11.2008 msv