IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 28033 of 2008 Between: 1 Yellapeddi Veerabhadra Rao S/o. Venkateswarlu J. Annavaram Village, Yeleswaram Mandal, East Godavari District. 2 . ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Social Welfare (LTR-2) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, rep. by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Additional Agent to Government, Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District. 3 The Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District. 4 The Special Deputy Tahsildar Tribal Welfare, Addatigala, East Godavari District. 5 The Tahsildar, Addatigala Mandal, Addatigala, East Godavari 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 orders in Revision Petition and further declare the order of the 3nd respondent in L.T.R.P.No.313/2003 dted 10.09.2003 as confirmed by the 2nd respondent in C.M.A.No.21/ 2004 dated 04.12.2008, as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, without jurisdiction and consequently set-a-side the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.BADANA.BHASKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the inaction of the 1st respondent in considering the revision filed by him against the order dated 4.12.2008 passed in CMA No.21 of 2004. The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of Acs.11.17 cents of land comprising Sy.No.18 of 59 of Kothurupadu Village, Addatigala Mandal, East Godavari District. Earlier, proceedings have been initiated for ejectment, against which an appeal was preferred and the same was dismissed as against the same, WP No.5250 of 1988 was filed by the petitioner and the same was disposed of by observing that the respondents are at liberty to initiate proceedings against the petitioner for being in possession of the land as non-tribal in the scheduled areas under provisions of any other law. Again, the 4th respondent filed a case in LTRP No.313 of 2002, under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Schedule Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959, as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970, before the 3rd respondent- Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Rampachodavaram. The 3rd respondent without examining the petitioner, issued eviction proceedings by directing the 5th respondent to implement the eviction orders and report compliance. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Additional Agent to the Government, Project Officer, ITDA, Bhadrachalam-2nd respondent. The appellate authority, on reconsidering the material placed on record, did not find any valid ground to interfere with the order passed by the primary authority and accordingly, dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, he filed revision before the 1st respondent and also moved stay application. There being no orders passed by the 1st respondent on the revision as well as the stay application, he approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare & Tribal Welfare appearing on behalf of R1 to R5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondents are contemplating to dispossess the petitioner from the land in dispute pending revision. The factual aspect of the petitioner filing revision before the 1st respondent is not in dispute. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the revision filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending consideration of the said revision, the respondents shall not interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in question. No costs. _________ 24-12-2008 Note: Issue wire at party’s costs. (B.O) rkk