IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 23916 of 2008 Between: S. Lakshmi Devi W/o. Late S. Prasad R/o. H.No.77-188-1-2, APSP Colony, Industrical Estate, Kurnool. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector Kurnool Kurnool District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer Kurnool. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer Kallur Mandal Kurnool 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari and call for the records pertaining to proceedings Rc.F. 653/2007, dt.04-03-2008 on the ﬁle of the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and in violation of the procedure prescribed under A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.PRAKASH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.23916 of 2008 Order: The petitioner claims to be the assignee of the land to an extent of Ac.0.26 in Survey No.140/1 of Kallur village in the year 1993 and since then, she has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. She states that the third respondent has also issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in her favour. While so, one Ch.Latha and two others ﬁled a petition before the second respondent under Section 5(5) of Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 to cancel the pattas granted in favour of the petitioner and the second respondent, without even informing about the date of hearing to the petitioner, passed the impugned order, dated 04.03.2008, canceling the passbooks granted in her favour. Questioning the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 13.06.2008, before ﬁrst respondent, namely, the Joint Collector, Kurnool, along with a stay application. However, the ﬁrst respondent has not passed any orders so far either on the appeal or in the stay application. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and at their request the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. Admittedly, the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the orders of the second respondent, dated 04.03.2008, is pending before the ﬁrst respondent. If the order of the second respondent is not stayed during the pendency of the appeal, the whole cause will become infructuous. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the ﬁrst respondent, namely, the Joint Collector, Kurnool, to pass appropriate orders either on the appeal or in the stay application preferred by the petitioner expeditiously and till such time, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 04.11.2008 VGB