THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.23234 of 2009 DATE:29.10.2009 Between: Alla Samatha ... Petitioner and The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and others ... Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.23234 of 2009 ORDER: According to the petitioner, she is the absolute owner of an extent of Acs.4.00 of land in Sy.Nos.588/2, 589/1 and 590/1 of Pidimgoyya village, Rajahmundry Rural Mandal, and has been running a health resort in the land in the name and style of "Sai Krishna Health Resorts, after getting permission from respondents 3 and 4. While so, the 3rd respondent passed an order dated 25.09.2009 directing her to remove the constructions in S.No.588/2. Questioning the same, she filed an appeal, as provided for under Section 14 of the A.P.(Andhra Area) Rivers Conservancy Act, 1884 (for short "the Act") before the 1st respondent on 06.10.2009 along with an application seeking stay of execution of the order of the 3rd respondent. As the 1st respondent neither took up the appeal nor the application for hearing so far, the 3rd respondent is taking steps to execute the order dated 25.09.2009. Being aggrieved by the same, she filed the present writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleaders for Revenue and Irrigation. 3. Section 14 of the Act deals with the power to direct removal of constructions, plantations, etc. But, as per the proviso, when once an appeal is filed by an aggrieved person within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of such order, the order shall automatically remain suspended until such appeal is decided. 4. Section 14 of the Act reads as follows: " Power to direct removal of constructions, plantations etc:- The Conservator of Rivers may, with the previous sanction of the Collector of the district, by an order in writing, require the owner or occupier of any land within any such river-bed to remove any groynes, building, constructiions, plantations, grasses, trees or other thing upon such land which the said Conservator may deem to be an obstruction to the course of the stream of such river; and it shall be the duty of such owner or occupier to act in compliance with such order within a time to be mentioned in such order; Provided that, in the case of the removal of any building being so ordered, it shall be open to the owner or other person in charge thereof to appeal, through the Collector of the district, against such order to the (Board of Revenue) within sixty days from the date of the receipt of such order; and in such case the order shall remain in abeyance until such appeal shall have been decided by the (Board of Revenue). 5. From the above, it is clear that the order dated 25.09.2009 of the 3rd respondent cannot be acted upon, during pendency of the appeal. However, as the petitioner is seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to decide the appeal at the earliest, this court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the respondents are directed not to remove the structures made by the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 29th October, 2009 CBS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.23234 of 2009 (Disposed of) 29th October, 2009 CBS