IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11453 of 2008 Between: 1 Y.Immanuel Dhan Raj S/o.late Isaiah R/o.G1, Plot No.49, Universal Residency, RKH Colony, A.S. Raonagar, ECIL Post, Secunderabad - 500 062. 2 Y.Sudhakar S/o.late Isaiah R/o.G1, Plot No.49, Universal Residency, RKH Colony, A.S. Raonagar, ECIL Post, Secunderabad - 500 062. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 2 The Tahsildar, C.K.Dinne, C.K.Dinne Mandal, Kadapa 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 issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not disposing the appeal E/201/2005 filed on 10-4-2006 in respect of the lands in Sy.No.441/2B an extent of Ac.5.00 and Sy.No.565/9 to 12 and Sy.No. 565/14 an extent of Ac.2.72 cents and Sy.No. 709 an extent of Ac. 3.75 cents of Mamillapalli Village, C.K. Dinne Mandal, Kadapa district as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners and 3 others forthwith basing upon the report submitted by the Mandal Revenue Officer, C.K. Dinne vide Proceedings No.B/93/2007 dated 11.6.2007 and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.DASARADHA RAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : W.P.NO. 11453 OF 2008 ORDER: The Tahasildar, C.K. Dinne, Kadapa district, the 2nd respondent herein, passed an order on 1.3.2006 cancelling the assignment of different extents of land in favour of the petitioners and directing resumption of the same. The petitioners claim to have presented an appeal before the 1st respondent under the relevant Board Standing Orders. Their grievance is that no orders have been passed so far and in the meanwhile the lands are being enjoyed by others on the basis of the order passed by the 2nd respondent. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The petitioners had availed the remedy provided under the Board Standing Orders against the order dated 1.3.2006 through which the assignment made in favour of the petitioners was cancelled. Obviously on account of the delay in prosecuting the remedies, the petitioners were dispossessed. Under these circumstances, the appeal needs to be disposed of without any further loss of time. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders on the appeal presented by the petitioners within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt.29.5.2008/KR ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 2 The Tahsildar, C.K.Dinne, C.K.Dinne Mandal, Kadapa District. 3. 2 CCs to GP for Revenue 4. 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}