THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.3443 of 2005 ORDER: According to the petitioners, they are the legal heirs of the original pattadars of the land admeasuring Ac.5.00 in R.S.No.87/6 situated at Somavaruppadu village, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore District. It is their case that on the applications filed by them, for grant of ryotwari patta, before the Settlement Officer, Nellore, pattas were granted in their favour by order dated 31.05.1982 in S.R.No.115/11(a)/81/NLR. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent-Director of Settlements, Hyderabad, initiated suo-moto enquiry in the year 1984 and ultimately, by order dated 23.09.2000, set aside the orders dated 31.05.1982 passed by the Settlement Officer, Nellore. Challenging the said order dated 23.09.2000, the petitioners preferred Revision Petition before the 1st respondent-Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad. However, as there was delay in filing the revision, the petitioners also filed delay condonation petition along with the revision petition. However, the 1st respondent, by order dated 20.11.2002, rejected the revision petition as time barred. Hence, this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. Admittedly, the Director of Settlements, Hyderabad, initiated suo moto enquiry against the order dated 31.05.1982 passed by the Settlement Officer, Nellore, in the year 1984, and ultimately passed the final orders in the year 2000, cancelling the patta granted by the Settlement Officer. When the suo moto enquiry taken up by the Director of Settlements was concluded after 16 years of its initiation, the delay of nearly two years in preferring the revision before the 1st respondent by the petitioners, who claim to be illiterate having no legal knowledge, could not have been taken very seriously. Therefore, on this ground, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated 20.11.2002 passed by the 1st respondent is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 20.11.2002 passed by the 1st respondent is set aside. Further, the 1st respondent is directed to take up the Revision Petition filed by the petitioners against the order dated 23.09.2000 passed by the Director of Settlements, A.P., Hyderabad, and pass appropriate orders as per law, without reference to the fact that there was a delay in filing the revision. Till disposal of the said Revision Petition, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 08.02.2011 v v