IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9041 of 2009 Between: 1 Boddeda Venkata Appa Rao S/o.Tatanna Resident of Nagulapalli village Munagapaka Mandal Visakhapatnam District 2 Boddeda Lakshmi W/o.Boddeda Venkata Appa Rao Resident of Nagulapalli village Munagapaka Mandal Visakhapatnam District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnma District 2 The Mandal Revenue officer,S.Rayavaram, Visakhapatnam District .....RESPONDENTS 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 any appropriate writ order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not disposing the application filed by the petitioners for grant of Ryotwari patta under sec.11(a) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra area) Estate, (abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 in respect of the land of an extent of Ac.30.00 in Rs.No.297 (Old 126) of Peddagunmmuluru village, S.Rayavaram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles, 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India as well as violative of the provisions of the Act and consequently direct the respondents to dispose the application filed by the petitioners under Sec.11(a) of the Act which is pending before the 1st respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioners filed an application under Section 11-A of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estate Abolition Act (for short ‘the Act’) for grant of ryotwari patta in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.30.00 in R.S.No.297 (old 126) of Peddagumuluru Village, Rayavaram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. The application was rejected on 17.04.1999 as time barred. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed a revision under Section 5(2) of the Act before the Commissioner and Director of Settlements, Hyderabad. Through his order, dated 11.09.2006, the Commissioner remanded the matter to the first respondent for fresh consideration and disposal. After such remand, the first respondent issued a notice, dated 02.02.2009 posting the case for hearing on 21.02.2009. The petitioners state that the matter is still pending before the first respondent. Their grievance is that the second respondent is trying to dispossess them. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. The petitioners have been making efforts before the authorities under the Act to get ryotwari patta. As of now, the proceedings are pending before the first respondent after remand. If petitioners are dispossessed from the land in question even while the matter is pending before the first respondent, virtually nothing would remain to be decided. The interests of the State can be protected, by directing that the petitioners shall not alienate or alter the nature of the land in question. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that the second respondent shall not interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the land in question, till the first respondent disposes of the application pending before him under Section 11-A of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 29th APRIL, 2009. kvni