HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14993 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the orders passed by the 2nd respondent in POT Appeal No. 1/Gnr/2008 in I.A. No. 1 of 2008, dated 3.7.2008 and set aside the same to the extent of rejecting the petition seeking stay of operation of order passed by the 1st respondent in Rc. No. E-723/2007, dated 14.8.2007 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the lands to an extent of Acs. 0.91 cents in R.S. Nos. 395/3. Acs. 0.91 cents in R.S No.395/4 and Acs.0.91 cents in R.S. No. 395/5 of Veduru Pavuluru Village, Gannavaram Mandal, Krishna District and pass such other orders.” The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of lands of an extent of Acs. 0.91 cents each in R.S. Nos. 395/3, 395/4 and 395/5 situated at Veduru Pavuluru Village of Gannavaram Mandal, Krishna District having purchased the same from the earlier owners. However, on the ground that the said lands were assigned lands and the petitioner purchased the same in violation of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short 'the 1977 Act), the Tahsildar, Gannavaram Mandal has passed the order of eviction on 14.8.2007 vide proceedings in Rc. No. E 723/2007. As against the said orders of the primary authority, the matter was carried in appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nuzvid, who by order dated 3.7.2008 rejected the application of the petitioner for grant of interim stay and posted the main appeal for hearing on 15.7.2008. Assailing the said order, the petitioner approached this Court by way of the present writ petition. It is the case of the petitioner that he was not served with any notice before passing the order of eviction dated 14.8.2007 and therefore the same is contrary to the provisions of the 1977 Act and the Rules made thereunder. This Court while admitting the writ petition on 14.7.2008, directed both the parties to maintain status-quo as regards possession and the said order is continuing all along. Though the petitioner pleaded that he was not served with any notice before the impugned order of eviction was passed, but in view of the pendency of the appeal before the appellate authority, it is not desirable for this Court to record any finding on the merits of the case. Taking into account the fact that the interim order was passed by this Court as long back as on 14.7.2008 and in view of the pendency of the appeal before the appellate authority, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the appeal expeditiously. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is however, made clear that the appellate authority shall consider the appeal independently, basing on the grounds raised by the petitioner in the appeal. It is also made clear that the order of eviction passed by the primary authority dated 14.8.2007 issued in proceedings Rc. No. E 723/2007 shall remain suspended till appropriate orders are passed by the appellate authority on the appeal filed by the petitioner. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY,J Date: 2nd August, 2011 pnb