IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 26674 of 2007 Between: Tekumalla Premalatha, W/o. Govinda Rao, D.No. 2-96, Venkat Nagar, Kakinada, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Commissioner of Survey Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad. 2 The Special Commissioner and Director of Settlements, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. .....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 a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the impugned action of the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent in not disposing the Revision Petition No. 11/99 by passing appropriate orders having reserved the orders on the last adjournment dated 4-7-2004 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice etc and consequently direct the Respondents particularly the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders in R.P. No. 11/99 without further delay. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.V.ANANTHA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent in not disposing the Revision Petition No.11 of 1999 by passing appropriate orders having reserved the orders on the last adjournment dated 04.07.2004, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that as against the order of the Joint Collector and Settlement Officer, Visakhapatnam in Sr.No.11a/1/98-VSP, dated 08.12.1998 in rejecting grant of ryotwari patta in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner said to have been filed revision before the 2nd respondent-Special Commissioner and Director of Settlements, A.P. Hyderabad and the said revision was numbered as R.P.No.11 of 1999 and notice dated 24.03.1999 was also issued, thereafter the said revision has not been considered and disposed of. It is stated that the said revision was heard on 03.07.2004 and the orders were reserved, but so far final orders have not been pronounced. I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the said contention as to whether the said revision is pending or not. The petitioner could have obtained the information under the Right to Information Act as to whether any revision is pending or disposed of. However, it is stated that the petitioner herself is the revision petitioner. Having regard to the facts of the case, if the said revision is not disposed of and no final orders have been passed in R.P.No. 11 of 1999 by the 2nd respondent, the 2nd respondent may consider and dispose of the said revision as expeditiously as possible, preferably within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:19.02.2008 Ccm To 1 The Commissioner of Survey Settlement and Land Records,Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 The Special Commissioner and Director of Settlements, A.P. Hyderabad. 3 2CCs to the Government Pleader for Revenue. 4 2 CD copies.