IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.27739 of 2008 Between: M.Jaya Paul S/o.Jayaraj R/o.D.No.6/2-A, Rapthadu Village, Rapthadu Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 3 The Tahsildar, Rapthadu, Rapthadu Mandal, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the resposndents trying to allotting the land an extent of Ac.3.50 cents in Sy.No. 140-1B situated at Rapthadu Village and Mandal, Anantapur District in favour of the third persons under Indiramma Programme without issuing any notice without giving any opportunity under A.P. assignment (Prohibition and Transfer) Act 9 of 1997, as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and violation of Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land an extent of Ac.3.50 cents in Sy.No. 140-1B situated at Rapthadu Village and Mandal, Anantapur District, and pass orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.27739 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner filed the instant writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents in trying to allot the land admeasuring Acs.3.50 in survey No.140 – 1B situated at Rapthadu Village and Mandal in Anantapur District in favour of third persons as illegal and arbitrary. The land referred to hereinabove was assigned to wife of the petitioner, Kanakadurga, by proceedings dated 16.01.2004. The petitioner and his family are allegedly in possession of the land after death of Kanakadurga. It appears, he made a representation on 22.06.2008 to third respondent to mutate his name, in vain. In the meanwhile, having come to know that the land is being allotted to third parties for the purpose of house sites, he filed instant writ petition placing reliance on the decision of this Court in Dammalapati Ramalingam v District Collector, Khammam District[1]. His contention is that even if there are violations of conditions of assignment, land can be resumed only in accordance with the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. On 19.12.2008 this Court directed learned Assistant Government Pleader to get instructions from the respondents having regard to the fact that the controversy is in a narrow compass. Today, learned Assistant Government Pleader has placed before this Court the proceedings of third respondent in R.Dis.No.(B)201/2008, dated 30.05.2008, whereby and whereunder the land was resumed to the Government on an allegation that the same was not cultivated for long time (the same is made part of the record). Learned Assistant Government Pleader also annexed three show cause notices issued to Smt.Kanakadurga, wife of the petitioner. Learned Counsel, however, submits that no notice was issued to the petitioner and the resumption itself is illegal. This is a matter, which has to be gone into by the appellate authority, namely, Revenue Divisional Officer, Ananthapur, second respondent herein. Petitioner is given liberty to obtain copy of the proceedings in R.Dis.No.(B)201/2008, dated 30.05.2008, and prefer an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As and when appeal is filed, second respondent may consider the same and pass appropriate orders. The Writ Petition, with the above observations, is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 22.12.2008 vs To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR} [1] 2006 (6) ALT 299