THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH W.P.No. 2223 of 2008 Dated: 14-02-2008 Between:- Tanikonda Adinarayanamma ..Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary to Revenue Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad and others. ..Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH W.P.No. 2223 of 2008 :O R D E R: It is the case of the petitioner that the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kondepi Mandal, Prakasam district assigned Ac.01-80 cents of land in survey No.320/2 situated at Chinakandlagunta village in her favour as per ‘D’ Form patta vide F.Dis.No. 3/1403 dated 02-09-1993 and that from the date of assignment, the petitioner is cultivating the said land without violating the terms and conditions of patta. While so, it is stated that the Tahasildar, Kondepi mandal, Prakasham district issued Form-I notice under Rule (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Alienation) Rules, 2007 (for short ‘the Rules’) stating that the petitioner alienated the land violating the provisions under Section 3 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Alienation) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’) and accordingly called upon the petitioner to submit the explanation within fifteen (15) days as to why the assignment granted in her favour should not be cancelled and the land is restored to Government. Pursuant to the notice, the petitioner submitted an explanation on 28-01-2008 stating that the petitioner herself is an assignee and is cultivating the land assigned to her and there was no violation of terms and conditions; that the patta and title deeds were also issued in her favour and that there cannot be any justification in restoration of the assigned land to the government. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner’s husband is a teacher and having Ac.40-69 cents of land in Chinakandlagunta and Pedakandlagunta villages of Kondapi mandal and therefore the assignment made in favour of the petitioner is irregular and the petitioner is not eligible for the assignment, but after coming to know the said fact, notice was issued seeking explanation from the petitioner, but no final orders have yet been passed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that if there is any irregular assignment, proper course has to be adopted in accordance with law for restoration of the assigned land. However, as no final orders have been passed, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the explanation submitted by the petitioner and take action in accordance with law. Having regard to the facts of the case, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed without following due process of law. No costs. ________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J Dated: 14-02-20078 Pvks/*