IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 24946 of 2008 Between: Matta Anand Paul S/o. Christu Dass R/o. Jagdish Colony, Bhadrachalam (V) & (M), Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Addl. Agent to Government & Project Officer ITDA. Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. 3 The Agency Divisional Officer Bhadrachalam Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. 4 The Tahsildar Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam District. 5 Pagidipally Muthyalu S/o. Nagaiah R/o. Bhadrachalam Village &Mandal, Khammam District. 6 Smt. Tursam Eswaramma W/o. Pottaiah R/o. Sri Ram Nagar Colony, Bhadrachalam Village &Mandal, Khammam 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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not passing the orders either on the stay petition or on the main Appeal ﬁled by petitioner against the orders in C.M.A. No.204 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the Additional Agent to Government cum Project Oﬃcer, I.T.D.A., Bhadrachalam, Khammam District, dt.21-06-2008 served on the petitioner on 20-09-2008 by conﬁrming the orders passed by the Agency Divisional oﬃcer, Bhadrachalam in L.T.R. Case No. 4/BCM/2006, Bhadrachalam, dt.16-03-2007 is illegal and void and opposed to Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner's land situated in Sy.No.89/1 to an extent of Ac.0.09 cents of Bhadrachalam Village & Mandal, Khammam District. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MUMMANENI.SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 24946 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been ﬁled by Matta Anand Paul, assailing the action of the 1st respondent in not entertaining the revision as well as stay application ﬁled by him challenging the order dated 21-6-2008 passed in C.M.A.No. 204 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the Additional Agent to Government- cum-Project Oﬃcer, I.T.D.A. Bhadrachalam, Khammam District-2nd respondent. 2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of Ac.0.09 cents in Survey No. 89/1 of Bhadrachalam. Proceedings have been initiated against him for ejectment on the ground of his possession in respect of the land in dispute being in contravention of provisions of A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970 ( herein after referred to as ‘ Regulation 1 of 1970). The primary authority found his possession is in contravention of the Regulation 1 of 1070. He challenged the order passed by the primary authority by ﬁling an appeal being C.M.A.No. 204 of 2007. The appellate authority conﬁrmed the order of the primary authority and thereby dismissed the appeal by judgment dated 21-6-2008. The petitioner ﬁled revision before the 1st respondent. Pending the revision, the Tahsildar, Bhadrachalam-4 th respondent is contemplating to attach the property in dispute. Hence, this writ petition. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare received notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for Respondents No.1 to 4. 5. The factual aspect of the petitioner ﬁling the revision before the 1st respondent is not contradicted by the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for respondents No.1 to 4. 6. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to entertain the revision ﬁled by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. There shall be status quo existing as on this day with regard to land in dispute till the disposal of the revision or the stay application, whichever is earlier. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 14th November, 2008 Note: C.C. by Monday B/o KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 24946 OF 2008 14th November, 2008.