HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1466 of 2008 Dated: 07.02.2008 Between: P.Muni Kesavarao. … Petitioner And The Agency Divisional Officer and others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1466 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the eviction order dated 28.04.2007 passed by the Agency Divisional Officer, Bhadrachalam, 1st respondent herein in L.T.R.Case No.1/Bhadrachalam/2004 in exercise of powers under the provisions of the A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner purchased an extent of Ac.4.00 of land covered by R.S.No.72/1 at Bhadrachalam Village and Mandal, Khammam District, under a sale deed dated 22.12.1969 from a non-tribal, before the prohibition of transfers came into force. Out of the said land, an extent of Ac.1.47 cents was acquired and compensation was paid. Further, it is stated that in spite of the fact that the transfer was not in violation of the said Regulations, the primary authority i.e., the Agency Divisional Officer, Bhadrachalam, 1st respondent herein, passed the order of eviction, dated 28.04.2007, with regard to a portion of the land, admeasuring Ac.0.20 cents covered by R.S.No.72/1. It is also stated that against the said order of eviction, the petitioner filed C.M.A.No.233 of 2007 before the appellate authority on 28.06.2007. In I.A.No.86 of 2007, the appellate authority granted interim stay on 11.10.2007 for a limited period of four months. Subsequently, the appeal itself was heard finally on 29.12.2007 and the orders were reserved. So far, final orders are not pronounced. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though the period mentioned in the interim order, dated 11.10.2007, in I.A.No.86 of 2007 has, come to an end and though the appeal was heard finally, the respondents are taking steps for eviction of the petitioner from the petition schedule area. Primarily, the order of eviction, dated 28.04.2007, is questioned on the ground that the land was purchased under a registered sale deed dated 22.12.1969 i.e., prior to the prohibition came into force. It is submitted that by way of A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970, prohibition was imposed only from 03.02.1970 and it is prospective in operation. Inasmuch as it is stated that against the order of eviction, the petitioner had already preferred an appeal and the same was finally heard on 29.12.2007, it is not necessary to record any findings on merits with regard to the grounds raised by the petitioner. Since the case of the petitioner is that the land was purchased on 22.12.1969 and a portion of it is being used for Company purpose, and as the appellate authority has already heard the appeal finally on 29.12.2007, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the 2nd respondent- appellate authority to dispose of C.M.A.No.233 of 2007 filed by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. Further, I direct that the order of eviction, dated 28.04.2007, passed by the 1st respondent in L.T.R. Case No.1/Bhadrachalam/2004 shall remain suspended, till the disposal of the appeal by the appellate authority. Subject to above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J Date: 07.02.2008 Note: Issue C.C. in two days. (B/o) JSU HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1466 of 2008 Dated: 07.02.2008