S.Suryarao v. State Of Andhra Pradesh

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No.1087 of 2018 ORDER:

On 16.12.2017, the petitioner filed revision petition before the 1st respondent against the order in C.M.A.No.4 of 2011, dated 14.11.2017.

Now the complaint of petitioner is that the 1st respondent is neither taking up stay application nor giving a date in the revision petition. While the matter stood thus, respondents 3 and 4 are attempting to dispossess the petitioner. Respondents 3 and 4 if dispossess the petitioner, it is submitted by Sri A.S.Narayana that the revision would substantially become infructuous and therefore, he prays for protecting the possession of petitioner pending revision.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the writ petition is filed without waiting for reasonable time for the Government to decide the stay application.

The objection of Assistant Government Pleader is merely placed on record and the same is rejected, for the revision petition was filed on 16.12.2017 along with stay application and the 1st respondent ought to have passed orders expeditiously. Having regard to the nature of order passed by the 2nd respondent and taking note of the fac t that the findings in

C.M.A.No.4 of 2011 are assailed before the 1st respondent, I am satisfied the writ petition can be disposed of by this order. (a) The 1st respondent considers disposing of the revision as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(b) The respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject matter of C.M.A.No.4 of 2011 till the disposal of revision. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. _____________ S. V. BHATT, J Dt: 18-01-2018 Prv