IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 22769 of 2008 Between: Smt. Qumar Siddiqua, W/o. Md.Bin Ahmed, R/o. H.No.19-2-27/A/26/5/M, phoolbagh, Jahnuma, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 2 The Revenue Divisional officer, East Division, Ranga Reddy district. 3 The Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy district. 4 M.Krishna Murthy, S/o. M.Bangaru, R/o. 1-54, Madinaguda, Serilingampally, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT. 5 C.Visweswara Rao, S/o. C.Venkata Ratnam, R/o. Flat No.306, Block No.1, CBT Estates, Deepthi Sree Nagr, Hafeezpet, Hyderabad. 6 B.Ramesh, S/o. Late bhaskar Rao, R/o. Flat No.9, Hema Durga Residency, Engineers Enclave, Chandanagar, Hyderabad. 7 C.Venugopal Krishna, S/o. C.Venkata Ratnam, R/o. Flat No.106, Block No.2, Sri Kalyans RBR Complex, Miyapur, Hyderabad. 8 A.V. Balakrishna, S/o. A.Mallikarijun Rao, R/o. Flat No.205, Block No.1, CBR Estates, Deepthi Sree Nagar, Hafeezpet, Hyderabad. 9 B.Bhaskar Rao, S/o. B.Venkateshwar Rao, R/o. Plot N.129, Hastinapuri Colony, Sainikpuri, Secunderabad. 10 M/s Sri Vishnu Priya Buildiers, Office At 110, Block B, Vijay Durga Estate, Nizampet Road, Kukatpally, rep by its Managing Partner, M.Hari Krishan, S/o. M.Chenna Kistaiah, 11 M/s Proactive Realtors Pvt Ltd., Office at Flat No.402, Geethanjali Enclave, 12-2-833, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad. REp by its Director Rajasekhar. 12 M/s Venesis Ventures Pvt Ltd., Rep by its Director Pamdimukkala Mohan Krishna, Office at No.304, Jagruthi Towers, Shymlal Buildings, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 13 M.Prabhakar, S/o. M.Krishna Murthy, R/o. 1-54, Madinaguda Village, Srilingampally, R.R.District. 14 M.Sudhakar, S/o. M.Krishna Murthy, R/o. 1-54, Madinaguda Village, Srilingampally, R.R.District. 15 M.Narasimha Murthy, S/o. Ramalingam, R/o. Flat No.308, Reliance Residency, Ramakrishna Mutt Road, Hyderabad. 16 N.V.Ramana Reddy, S/o. N.C.Nagi Reddy, R/o. KVR Constructions, Vinayak Nagar, Proddutur, Kadapa .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 1st respondent in entertaining stay application ﬁled along with Case No.D5/1848/2008, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.VENKATA MAYUR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.22769 of 2008 ORDER: The case of the petitioner is that she is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject lands, admeasuring Ac.0.28 gts. in Sy.No.76 and Ac.0.03 gts in Sy.No.86 situated at Madinaguda village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having obtained the same by virtue of the Judgment and Decree, dated 06.08.2002, passed in O.S.No.23 of 2001 on the ﬁle of the Senior Civil Judge, Rangal Reddy District, and pursuant thereto, her name was also mutated in the revenue records, pertaining to the subject lands. While so, she came to know that the names of respondents 4 to 16 were mutated in the revenue records, by proceedings, dated 09.09.2002, of the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, in respect of the subject lands, without issuing any notice to the petitioner. Challenging the said proceedings, the petitioner preferred an appeal in Appeal No.C/384/2007, under Section 5(5) of A.P.Records in Land and Pattedar Passbooks Act, 1971, to the 2nd respondent, namely the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, East Division, Ranga Reddy District, and the same was dismissed, by an order dated 08.01.2008, on the ground that since certain civil suits in respect of the subject land are pending before competent Civil Courts, the authority cannot decide the matter, and the validity of transfer made through the various registered documents can be gone into by the competent civil Courts only. The main grievance of the petitioner is that as against the order, dated 08.01.2008, passed by the 2nd respondent dismissing the appeal preferred by her against the order, dated 09.09.2002, of the 3rd respondent, she ﬁled revision bearing Revision No.D5/1848/2008 along with stay petition, before the 1st respondent, namely the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, on 18.03.2008, but so far no orders thereon have been passed. Hence, she ﬁled the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and both of them agreed to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: The 1st respondent-Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, is directed to consider and dispose of the revision preferred by the petitioner against the orders of the 2nd respondent, and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, after issuing notices to the aﬀected parties. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA,J 18.10.2008 v v