TELLI SHYAMAL RAO Vs. STATE OF A. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri T. Diwakar Reddy, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri G. Venkata Reddy, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

(2.) The learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has brought it to the notice of this Court the earlier litigations and the Order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.14663/2019, dtd. 8/8/2023. The learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners would submit that the learned Single Judge, while allowing the Writ Petition of the Writ Petitioners herein, had directed the District Collector/Respondent No.2 to consider the Report placed before the Authority and if necessary, afford an opportunity to the Petitioners and pass appropriate reasoned Order within a period of six weeks. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners that since there is inaction on the part of the Respondent No.2 in complying with the direction of this Court in W.P.No.14663/2019, the Writ Petitioners were constrained to file Contempt Case bearing C.C.No.3623/2024. The Contempt Case bearing C.C.No.3623/2024 was disposed of on 18/10/2024, closing the said Contempt Case in view of the subsequent developments. The learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners would submit that the Endorsement issued by the Respondent No.2 dtd. 21/9/2024, which is impugned herein, is prima facie perverse in as much as the Respondent No.2 had once again not considered the Proceedings of the Tahsildar dtd. 23/8/2018 (Ex.P5).

(3.) Sri Arjun Chowdhary, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has submitted that the Tahsildar as well as the Revenue Divisional Officer submitted revised Reports on 9/1/2024 and 19/9/2024 respectively, which are shown as Reference Nos.11 and 12 in the Impugned Order. He would submit that the present Writ Petition is misconceived inasmuch as the Appeal/Revision lies before the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration (CCLA).