APHC010141972025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7663/2025 Between: Boddapati Krishnam Naidu, ...PETITIONER AND The Commissioner Of Appeals and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P ROY REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. CHINTAPALLI SRINIVAS 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7663/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Prohibition against the 1st respondent Commissioner of Appeals, Office of the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, in proceeding with the Revision Petition No.363/2005 (CCLA’s Ref No.V1/538/2005) which was filed against the Order of the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam in Appeal: AIA No.4/99/C, dated 17.05.2005 and pass such other order.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ch.Srinivas, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the other respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s father preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent. The said appeal was allowed vide order dated 17.05.2005 and the matter was remitted to the primary authority. Thereafter, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Pendurthi granted a ryotwari patta dated 15.12.2006 to the petitioner’s father. The 4th respondent preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent challenging the ryotwari patta dated 15.12.2006 granted in favour of the petitioner’s father and the said appeal was dismissed vide order dated 08.08.2013. Later, the 3 4th respondent filed a revision petition i.e. R.P.No.363/2005. Though the said revision petition has become infructuous by virtue of the order of remand by the Appellate Authority, the same has not been closed and kept pending. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader furnished written instructions dated 02.04.2025, wherein it is stated as follows: “I further submit that Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy devasthanam, Simhachalam rep. By its Executive Officer, Simhachalam has filed revision petition u/w.14(a) of A.P. Andhra Area Inam (Abolition and Conversion into Ryothwari) Act, 1956 challenging the orders dated 17.05.2005 in AIA No.4/99/C passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer and Appellate Authority under Inams Act, Visakhapatnam, wherein it is directed the Mandal Revenue Officer to conduct fresh enquiry relating to Sy.No.12 of Cheemalapalli Village and grant Ryotwari Patta as contemplated u/s.7 of the Act as illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently to set aside the impugned orders. At present the revision petition is pending at Commissioner of Appeals.” 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the written instructions furnished by the learned Assistant Government, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the Revision Petition No.363 of 2005 pending before him with reference to the ryothwari patta granted in 4 favour of the petitioner’s father in the year 2006, within a period of two(2) months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 02.04.2025 TTPPSS 5 228 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:7663 of 2025 02.04.2025 TTPPSS