Telangana High Court
WP/38740/2013 of Naikoti Kistaiah Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer, on 31 December 2013
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.Nos.38740, 38762 and 39039 of 2013 Date : 31-12-2013 W.P.No.38740/2013 Between : Naikoti Kistaiah and others .. Petitioners And The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sanga Reddy Division, Medak District and others .. Respondents Counsel for petitioners : Sri M. Vidyasagar
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
W.P.Nos.38740, 38762 and 39039 of 2013
Date : 31-12-2013
W.P.No.38740/2013
Between :
Naikoti Kistaiah and others ..
Petitioners
And
The Revenue Divisional Officer,Sanga Reddy Division,Medak District and others ..
Sanga Reddy Division,Respondents
Counsel for petitioners : Sri M. VidyasagarCounsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Assistant GovernmentPleader for Revenue The Court made the following order :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
COMMON ORDER:
These three Writ Petitions have been filed with acommon grievance, namely, that respondent No.1 has notbeen disposing of the appeals filed by the petitionersagainst the issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deedsin favour of the private respondents.
At the hearing, the learned Assistant GovernmentPleader for Revenue (Telangana Area), submitted that asper his instructions, W.P.No.19723/2007 filed questioningG.O.Ms.No.1077, Revenue (Assn.IV) Department, dated 7-8-2007, has been pending and that in view of the same, theappeals are not being disposed of. He is, however, unableto state as to the nature of the order passed in the said WritPetition and how the lands which are subject matters of theappeals filed by the petitioners are connected with theabove mentioned Writ Petition.
In the light of the grievance of the petitioners regardingnon-disposing of the appeals, respondent No.1 is directed todispose of the appeals filed by the petitioners within a periodof two months from the date of receipt of this order, if noorder staying the appeals is passed by this Court. If respondent No.1 finds any legal constraints in disposing ofthe appeals, he shall issue a communication to thepetitioners in writing giving reasons for his inability todispose of the appeals within a period of one week from thedate of receipt of this order.
Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petitions aredisposed of.
As a sequel to the disposal of the Writ Petitions,W.P.M.P.Nos.48161, 48183 and 48496 of 2013, filed in therespective Writ Petitions for interim reliefs, are disposed ofas infructuous.
Date : 31-12-2013
________________________
Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
AM