IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 577 of 2009 Between: Mohd. Fayaz Ahmed S/o.Mohd. Abdul Gafoor President of Muslim Aquaf Development Committee, H.No.2-6-74/2, Peddapalli Village & Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddapalli, Karimnagar District. 3 The Assistant Engineer, (R&B), Peddapalli, Karimnagar District. 4 Mohd. Azeemuddin S/o.Amjed Ali R/o.4-3-85, Moghalpura, Peddapalli, Karimnagar District. 5 Mohd. Mumtaj Ali S/o.Amjed Ali R/o.4-3-77, Moghalpura, Peddapalli, Karimnagar 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 appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 1st Respondent in disposing of the appeal filed by the Petitioner on 10.12.2007 under Section 158 of the A P (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act seeking cancellation of allotment of land in an extent of 954 sq. yards made by the 2nd respondent for construction of Shadikhana as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, contrary to law, violative of principles of natural justice and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner before the 1st respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAVINDER Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims to have preferred an appeal before the District Collector, Karimnagar, the first respondent herein, aggrieved by allotment/assignment of 954 square yards of land in survey No.1701 of Peddapalli Village, in favour of respondents 4 and 5 herein. The basis was that an application filed by the petitioner for assignment of the same towards parking place for Edgah, is pending. The grievance of the petitioner is that though more than one year has passed, the first respondent did not take any steps for disposal of the appeal. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The petitioner had approached this Court on an earlier occasion and the appeal before the first respondent came to be filed, in pursuance of the observations made in the earlier writ petition. Having regard to the multifarious functions to be discharged by the first respondent, it cannot be said that there was any undue delay on his part in disposal of the appeal. Be that as it may, the early disposal of the appeal would give quietus to the controversy and clear the way for effective utilization of the land. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing that the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the appeal preferred by the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, duly issuing notice to the affected parties. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dated:21.01.2009 Note : Furnish C.C. in one week. (B/o) GJ