THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.17528 OF 2006 23.08.2006 Between: S.Venkat Reddy, S/o.Narayan Reddy And others … Petitioners AND The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad And others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.17528 OF 2006 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent herein, namely, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division (RDO), to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners without being influenced by any political pressure and pronounce the order as early as possible in the interest of justice. The petitioners herein filed an application under Section 3(3) of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (the Act, for brevity) before the third respondent for correction of entries in pahanies pertaining to the land in survey Nos.232, 233 and 234 situated at Manchirevula Village of Rajendranagar Mandal in Ranga Reddy District. After conducting enquiry, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajendranagar Mandal (MRO), allowed the said application directing the deletion of the names of respondents 4 to 7 herein. Aggrieved by the said order of the MRO dated 15.4.2006, the contesting respondents filed an appeal before the RDO on 09.5.2006. Admittedly, the RDO heard the arguments on 22.7.2006 and reserved the matter for orders. The petitioner alleged that after reserving the matter for orders, the MRO under the influence of politicians called for the report of the MRO, which is not warranted for disposal of the appeal. The leaned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General) refutes this contention. After considering the contention raised and perusing the material placed before this Court, this Court holds that the writ petition is filed making unsupported allegations and when the RDO admittedly reserved the case for orders, there is no reason to doubt that the orders would be passed not basing on the material available in the record. If for getting any clarification, the RDO being appellate authority, calls for report of the MRO, the same cannot be faulted. The writ petition is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) August 23, 2006 YS