IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 18149 of 2014 BETWEEN V.Ramesh Reddy AND ... PETITIONER State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that his revision along with the stay petition being revision petition No.F2/837/2014 pending before the Joint Collector, Nalgonda, is not taken up at least to the extent of interim application. Petitioner also states that the said revision is preferred against the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer, in file No.E1/1081/13, dated 18.01.2014, and though the revision was filed along with the stay petition, no orders are passed so far.
3. Learned government pleader, on instructions, submits that the revision petition of the petitioner was filed on 28.01.2014, but the interim application for stay was filed only on 16.06.2014 and respondent No.2, Joint Collector, fixed the date of hearing as 28.06.2014. However, on that day neither party appeared. Hence, it is now posted to 06.09.2014.
4. Since respondent No.2 has already fixed the said revision along with the interim application to 06.09.2014, no further orders are necessary except directing respondent No.2 to consider and dispose of at least the interim application of the petitioner pending the said revision on the date so fixed.
5. It is open for the petitioner to seek advancement of hearing to the extent of stay petition if there is such an urgency, which cannot wait up to the scheduled date i.e., 06.09.2014. However, such an application, if filed, petitioner will have to give notice to the contesting respondents and with their consent an early date can be fixed by respondent No.2.
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J July 21, 2014 LMV