IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7293 of 2008 Between: Mohd. Ahmed Ali, S/o.Mukhtar Ali, R/o.Manneguda village, Podur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy Division, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Podur Mandal, Ranga Reddy 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 order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not passing the order in Appeal No. B/4384/98 is illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to identify/trace out the file and pass appropriate orders in appeal No. B/4384/98 filed by the petitioner and consequently direct t he 3rd respondent not to allot the petitioner's land to the third party during the pendency of the appeal before the 2nd respondent and pass such further other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G.RAVI MOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.7293 of 2008 ORDER: As against the order dated 16.01.1999 passed by the respondent No.3, namely, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Poduru Mandal, resuming the lands of the petitioner, he preferred an appeal to respondent No.2, namely, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vikarabad, on 25.09.2007. While the said appeal is pending, it is the case of the petitioner that respondents are trying to dispossess him from the land in question. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and both of them agreed for disposal of the writ petition with the following directions. Respondent No.2 is directed to dispose of either the appeal itself or the stay application filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, till such time, the respondents are directed not to take any action for eviction of the petitioner from the land in question. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (N.V. RAMANA, J) 03.04.2008 ksr/sh To 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy Division, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Podur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4 2CCs to G.P. for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies