IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 6013 of 2008 Between: Smt. Saggu Girija, W/o. Raghunadha Reddy, R/o. D.No. 49-54-7/4, Ajitha Apartments, Balayya Sastry Layout, Balaji Hills, Visakhapatnam - 530 013. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam (Rural). 3 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam ...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 action of the respondents 1 and 2 and their officials to forcibly dispossess her from the lands in an extent of Ac. 4-09 cents in S.No. 142/3 and an extent of Ac. 2-23 cent sin S.No. 142/2 of Chippada Village, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District on the basis of orders of the 1st respondent in R.C.No. 332/06/A/ dated 7-1-2008 passed, against which she filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent, and before whom a stay petition is also pending, as illegal, arbitrary, ultravires, malafide and against the principles of Natural Justice and against the Constitutional guarantees, and to consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 not to dispossess her from the lands above mentioned, during the pendency of appeal pending before the 2nd respondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SARVA BHOUMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the action of respondents 1 and 2 in trying to dispossess her from the lands in an extent of Ac.4.09 cents in S.No.142/3 and an extent of Ac.2.23 cents in S.No.142/2 of Chippada village, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and at their request the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. It is the case of the petitioner that against the eviction orders passed by the 1st respondent – Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District dated 7.1.2008 in R.C.No.332/06/A, she preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam (Rural) on 25.2.2008 under Section 4-A(2) of the A.P.Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 along with a stay application and so far no orders are passed either on the stay application or in the main appeal and pending adjudication of the said appeal, now the respondents are trying to dispossess her from the lands in question and thus seeks for a direction to the respondents not to evict her from the lands till the disposal of the appeal by the 2nd respondent. In the circumstances, since the appeal filed by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent is still pending, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and till such time, the respondents are directed not to evict the petitioner from the lands in question. N.V.RAMANA,J Note: CC in 2 days. (B/o) msv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam (Rural). 3 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam 4 2CCs to Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies