Judgment :- 1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 2 and 3 from in any manner proceeding with or demolishing the construction put up by the petitioner in S.No.4221/2F2 and 4221/2GB, Ootacamund pursuant to the proceedings of the Collector, The Nilgris District at Uthagamandalam and made in Rc.D7.No.21222/2002-6 dated 17.7.2002 and received on 23.7.2002 pending disposal of the review petition before the first respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that a review petition has been filed to the first respondent and the same is pending. 3. The writ petition was admitted on 5.8.2002. In the W.P.M.P.No.46938 of 2002 notice to the respondents was ordered. Private notice was also permitted. The W.P.M.P.No.46938 of 2002 was dismissed on 15.9.2003 observing as follows:- “Though this writ petition was admitted on 5.8.2002 this court has not granted interim stay. Hence, I do not find any merit to grant interim stay after a period of one year. Hence, this petition is dismissed.” 4. Today when the matter is listed for final disposal, Mr.P.Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent filed a counter-affidavit wherein it is stated that the request for reclassification of land was rejected in G.O.(D)No.651 Housing and Urban Development (UD4-1) Department dated 28.10.2004. 5. In the writ petition, the petitioner states that he has preferred a review to the first respondent along with a stay petition on 29.7.2002. Since the review petition is pending before the first respondent along with application for stay and in view of the G.O.(D) No.651 Housing and Urban Development (UD4-1) Department dated 28.10.2004, petitioner is at liberty to pursue the review application before the first respondent on its own merits and in accordance with law. This court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings of the respondents 2 and 3 at this stage when the review application is pending before the first respondent. Petitioner is entitled to take appropriate proceedings as may be advised. The writ petition at this point of time, cannot be considered on merits. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the writ petitioner as above. No costs.