IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.14573 of 2004 Between: K. Janardhana Reddy, S/o. Late K. Venkata Reddy, R/o Nagulapalli, Medchal Mandal, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Medchal Mandal, R.R. District. 2 The Village Secretary, Kistapur Village, Medchal Mandal, R.R. District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, R.R. District, Lakadikapool, Hyderabad. 4 The District Revenue Officer, R.R.District, Lakadikapool, Hyderabad. 5 Kumba Rami Reddy, S/o. Penta Reddy, R/o. Kistapur, Medchal Mandal, R.R. 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 a writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent, Mandal Revenue Officer, Medchal passing an order dt.6-5-2004 bearing No. Pro.B/2604/2004 deleting the name of the petition from the revenue records and including the name of the 5th respondent and his family in the records as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the law and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 not to take any action in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.K.CHAKRAVARTHY, Advocate Counsel for the Respondents 1to 4: Govt. Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: It is stated that on an application made by K.Veeranna, the name of K.Pratap Reddy was deleted from the Pahanies of the year 1954-55 by restoring the name of Veeranna. Thereafter, petitioner filed O.S.No.561 of 1995 before the I Additional District Senior Civil Judge, R.R.District as an indigent person contending that he is the owner of the property which was contested by the 5th respondent and the same was dismissed. Against which petitioner filed A.S.No.70 of 2003 and the same is pending. While so, the 5th respondent filed an application before the 1st respondent for mutation of his name in the revenue records, and orders were passed on 06-05-2004 ordering for mutation of the name of the 5th respondent in the revenue records. Aggrieved by the same petitioner filed appeal before the District Revenue Officer, Ranga Reddy District—4th respondent on 07-06-2004 and the same is pending. Along with the appeal petitioner also filed an application for stay. But so far no orders are passed on the stay petition. Taking advantage of the order passed by the 1st respondent dated 06-05-2004 the 2nd respondent is likely to change the entries in the revenue records. In view of the same, petitioner filed the present writ petition. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner filed appeal against the orders passed by the 1st respondent before the 4th respondent, he is under obligation to dispose of the said appeal including the stay petition at an early date, if any filed. In view of the same, 4th respondent is hereby directed to pass appropriate orders on the stay petition filed by the petitioner and communicate the same to the 2nd and 5th respondents within a period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J 18-08-2004 Murthy ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1The Mandal Revenue Officer, Medchal Mandal, R.R. District. 2The Village Secretary, Kistapur Village, Medchal Mandal, R.R. District. 3The Revenue Divisional Officer,R.R. District,Lakadikapool,Hyderabad. 4 The District Revenue Officer, R.R.District, Lakadikapool,Hyderabad. 5 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 2.2CD copies.