IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 21775 of 2007 Between: 1 Miriyala Venkataramana S/o.Nukaraju Resident of Nandivampu village Tuni mandal, East Godavari District 2 Pakkurti Nookaratnam W/o.P.Ramana resident of Nandivampu village, Tuni Mandal, East Godavari District ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari District, at Kakinada 2 The Tahasildar, Tuni Mandal, East Godavari 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 writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the in action of the 2nd respondent in act upon the representation of the petitioners dated 20.8.2007 seeking assignment in respect of house site in which the petitioners raised two thatched houses in an extent of 4 cents in D.No.1- 81/1 of Nandivampu village, Tuni Mandal, East Godavari District is arbitrary, illegal, and against the AP Occupants of Homesteads (Conferment of Ownership) Act 1976 and consequently direct the respondents No.2 to act upon the representation of the petitioners dated 20.8.2007. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.V.NARAYANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that though they submitted a representation on 20.8.2007 to the respondents seeking assignment of an extent of 4 cents of house site in S.No.30/9 of Nandivampu Village, Tuni Mandal, East Godavari as they are landless poor persons belonging to backward class community, so far no orders have been passed on the said representation. It is also their case that the District Collector has endorsed on their representation ‘ please issue patta, if they are eligible and if the land is unobjectionable’ but the 2nd respondent is not conducting any survey nor passing any orders on their representation. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. Even though this Court on 11.10.2007 directed the learned Government Pleader to get instructions in the matter, so far no instructions have been obtained. In the circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, the Tahsildar – 2nd respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioners in the light of the instructions issued by the Collector and pass appropriate orders expeditiously.. With the above direction the writ petition is disposed of. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.19.6.2008 msv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Collector, East Godavari District, at Kakinada 2 The Tahasildar, Tuni Mandal, East Godavari District 3 Two CCs to Govt.Pleader for Revenue, High Court of A.P. Hyd. 4 2 CD copies.