IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 14738 of 2005 Between: Shaik Bibi John W/o. Shaik Aslam Saheb R/o. Hasnapuram Village Anumasamudrampeta Mandal Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Nellore Nellore District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer Nellore Nellore Dist. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer Anumasamudrampeta Village & Mandal Nellore Dist. 4 The Panchayat Secretary Chiramana Village, Anumasamudrampeta Village & Mandal Nellore Dist. 5 Varikoti Lakshmikanthamma D/o. Polayya R/o. Hasnapuram Village, Anumasamudrampeta Mandal Nellore Dist. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not considering the case of the petitioner for conducting enquiry as per the provisions of A.P Assigned Lands (P.O.T) Act, 1977 and not issuing pattadar pass book to the petitioner as arbitrary and unreasonable and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct an enquiry with regard to the re-allotment of the lands to an extent of Ac.4.06 cents situated in S.No.1078/2 of Hasnapuram Village, Anumasamudrampeta Mandal, Nellore District as per the provisions of the Act and also direct the respondents to issue pattadar passbook to the said lands and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.TUHIN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 14738 of 2005 28-01-2009 Oral Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Venkat Narayana, learned counsel for the respondent No.5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 5th respondent has not chosen to file counter affidavit. The petitioner is in substance, aggrieved that the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have not restored/re-allotted land in an extent of Ac.04-06 cents in survey No. 1078/2 of Hasnapuram village, Anumasumadrampeta mandal, Nellore district, to her. According to the averments in the counter affidavit, one Shaik Rasool Saheb, the petitioner’s father and a resident of Hasanapuram village was assigned the schedule land by the proceedings dated 13-09-1974. On the death of Shaik Rasool Saheb in 1990, the petitioner alienated the land in favour of the 5th respondent and left the village with her husband – Shaik Aslam Saheb. It would transpire that the land was later sold to one Smt. Mahipal Singh Sai Lalitha through a registered document dated 28-03-1998 and later the land somehow came into the possession of Sri Sreenivasulu of Sri Sarada School, Nellore. Since Section 3 (1) of A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (Act No. 9 of 1977) prohibits and invalidates transfer by an assignee of assigned land, the 5th respondent, according to the counter affidavit, acquired no title to the property and therefore could not convey a title to others either. Having executed the sale deed in favour of the 5th respondent (admitted in paragraph No.5 of the writ petition, though stated that the sale deed was executed under a mistaken impression that it was a lease deed), the petitioner nevertheless petitioned the 1st respondent on 08-11-2004 for a Pattedar Pass Book claiming to be the sole legal heir of the original assignee – Shaik Rasool Saheb. This petition appears to have been forwarded by the 1st respondent to the 3rd respondent for verification. Thereupon, the 3rd respondent addressed the 1st respondent on 02-02-2005 stating that the petitioner is not residing in Chiramana village, but there is no objection to restore the land to the legal heir of the original pattedar, if she cultivates the land with the help of her husband by residing in Chiramana village. On this letter of the 3rd respondent, the 1st respondent by an endorsement dated 28-04-2005 addressed the petitioner to approach the 3rd respondent for appropriate action. The petitioner has not filed any affidavit in response to the averments in the 3rd respondent’s counter wherein the decision contained in the 1st respondent’s endorsement dated 28-04- 2005 is pleaded. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the 3rd respondent for appropriate action on the proposals of the 3rd respondent and on which the 1st respondent had made the endorsement dated 28-04-2005. On the petitioner approaching the 3rd respondent with a written request, the 3rd respondent is directed to take appropriate action within four weeks from the date of such request by the petitioner. The 3rd respondent shall communicate the action taken, to the petitioner by registered post acknowledgement due. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 28-01-2009 Pvks