THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.20983 of 2007 ORDER: The Inam Deputy Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam granted ryotwari patta under the A.P. (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act (for short ‘the Act’) in favour of respondents 4 and 5 herein, vide proceedings dated 25.06.2003, in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.4.78 cents in Survey No.25/2 of Jaggarajupet Village. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam, 2nd respondent herein. The appeal was rejected on 02.07.2005. Initially the petitioners filed an application on 01.08.2005 before the District Collector, Visakhapatnam. Through his endorsement, dated 15.12.2006, the District Collector advised the petitioners to approach the Commissioner of Appeals, 1st respondent herein. Simultaneously the petitioners filed a revision under Section 14-A of the Act before the 1st respondent. Through order, dated 24.10.2006, the 1st respondent refused to entertain the revision on the ground that the application filed by the petitioners before the Collector is still pending. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. The impugned order dated 24.10.2006 provides for an instance of non-application of mind. The petitioners availed the statutory remedy under Section 14-A of the Act before the 1st respondent. The very preamble of the impugned order discloses that it was a revision filed against the order passed by the 2nd respondent. Instead of entertaining the same, by passing orders on merits, he has chosen to reject it, on the sole ground that an application filed by the petitioners before the District Collector is pending. That application was not referable to any provision of law and at any rate, that was rejected through an endorsement, may be subsequent to the impugned order. The 1st respondent cannot abdicate his responsibility to adjudicate the matter on merits. The writ petition is accordingly allowed and the impugned order is set aide. The matter is remanded to the 1st respondent for fresh consideration and disposal on merits. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 29.04.2009 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.20983 of 2007 Date: 29.04.2009 JSU