IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWELVETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 11165 of 2004 Between: 1 P. Prem Sai Babu, S/o P. Mohan Raju, R/o Chinnagadela Village, Chinnagadela Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam. 2 Smt. G. Veeraganga Visalakshi, W/o Laxmana Rao, R/o Power Pet, Eluru, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Chinnagadela Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Special Surveyor, Office of the Special Tahsildar (LA), Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in not taking any action on the representations dated 27-8-2001, 21-4-2004 and 15-6-2004 submitted by the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and unreasonable and consequently direct the respondents to take immediate action and pass orders immediately on the representations submitted by the petitioners after following due procedure according to law and after giving an opportunity of personal hearing and take immediate action or correcting the wrong entries made by the Adangal, Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.RAJENDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 11165 of 2004 Oral order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. The only grievance of the petitioners as projected in the writ petition is that though they made representations dated 21-4-2004 and 15-6-2004, requesting respondent No.1 to conduct and enquiry and make necessary corrections in the Settlement Fair Adangal and 10(1) Adangal, no action had been taken thereon. They, therefore, filed the present writ petition. Though the learned Government Pleader for Revenue sought time to get instructions in the matter, he did not report any instructions. He, however, agreed that the writ petition be disposed of with the following directions: Respondent No.1 is directed to consider and dispose of the representations dated 21-4-2004 and 15-6-2004, in accordance with law, and pass appropriate speaking orders thereon, expeditiously, and in any case, not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: July 12, 2004. KSR