THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10535 of 2010 April 30, 2010 Between: K.Venkataiah, S/o.Balaiah … Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by Principal Secretary, Revenue (Assn.1) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad And others ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10535 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner is Ex-serviceman. He served Indian Army in MEG as Nayak. He was discharged from the Army on 31.10.2005. Considering his application, he was assigned land admeasuring Acs.5.00 in survey No.110 situated at Peda Adirala Village of Jadcherla Mandal in Mahabubnagar District under Ex- servicemen quota. He is allegedly in possession of the land. The District Collector cancelled the assignment dated 27.10.2009 on the ground that the assignment was in violation of the guidelines in G.O.Ms.No.743, dated 30.4.1963. Petitioner therefore filed review petition under Section 166C of Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, before the Government on the ground that it is contrary to the guidelines to G.O.Ms.No.743 and that the petitioner failed to bring the land under cultivation. He also prayed for stay of the proceedings of the District Collector. By impugned Memo No.4856/Assn.I(1)/2010-1, dated 27.3.2010, the Government rejected the stay while summoning records from the District Collector. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed. This Court heard the counsel for petitioner and the Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana Area). In Narasimha Raju v State of Andhra Pradesh[1] Manda Ram Reddy v Government of Andhra Pradesh[2], this Court took the view that pending appeal or revision, if the order challenged is not stayed, the same will have effect of rendering such appeal or revision futile and ineffective. In this case, if the order of District Collector is not stayed and pending review – which might take some time for disposal; the land is reassigned to somebody else, petitioner would certainly be prejudiced especially in these days when there is lot of pressure on the Government to find suitable vacant lands for assignment to poor sections. Therefore, it is a fit case to order stay for limited period and direct the Government to dispose of the review. Accordingly while directing that the order of second respondent shall not be implemented for a period of four months, the Government is directed to dispose of the review filed by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) April 30, 2010 YS [1] 1959 ALT 66 (NRC) [2] 2006 (1) ALD 441: 2006 (2) ALT 371