THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.314 of 2006 Dated: 23-11-2006 Between: Nadella Estates Limited, rep. byi ts Managing Director, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND The Joint Collector, Medak, and others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO WRIT PETITION No.314 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioner filed appeals before respondent No.2, namely, the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) under Section 5(B) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (the Act, for brevity) against the orders of respondent No.3, namely, the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO) in proceedings No.B/4166/03 dated 17-11-2003 and dated 03-06-2004 and proceedings No.B/1238/02 dated 16-12- 2002 in respect of the land survey Nos.175, 181 and 183 situated at Kollur Village, Ramchandrapur Mandal. He also sought for interim orders not to change the entries in the record of rights. RDO issued notices to respondents 4 to 6, heard the counsel for respective parties and passed interim orders in appeal proceedings Nos.A3/3217/2005 and A3/3216/2005 dated 02-12-2005 directing MRO not to make any further entries in respect of land. No revision was filed against the same by respondents 4 to 8 or the petitioner herein. However, purporting to take action on a representation made by the villagers of Kollur on 22-12- 2005, respondent No.1, by proceedings No.F3/9/ROR/05 dated 29-12-2005, vacated the orders of RDO in the two appeal proceedings referred to hereinabove. This is assailed in this writ petition, inter alia, on the ground that no notice was issued to the petitioner or respondents 4 to 8. In the counter-affidavit filed by the contesting respondents the allegation that respondent No.1 did not give any notice before vacating the interim orders passed by RDO is not denied. As the matter is still pending at the appellate stage before RDO, it would be in the interests of the parties to direct RDO to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As respondent No.1 passed the impugned order without notice, the same, being Proceedings No.F3/9/ROR/05 dated 29-12- 2005, is set aside and this writ petition is disposed of with the above direction to RDO. Though interlocutory applications are listed, the writ petition is being disposed of as above. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 23rd November, 2006 ghn