IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3912 of 2005 Between: Sri P. Devender Kumar & others. … Petitioners AND District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Lakadikapul, Hyderabad & another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri T. Durga Reddy Counsel for the respondents : GP for Revenue This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3912 of 2005 ORDER:- WVMP.No.639 of 2006 is filed to vacate order dated 01.03.2005 passed in WPMP.No.5270 of 2005 in WP.No.3912 of 2005. In the manner in which the order is proposed to be passed, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition itself. The petitioners claim to have purchased plots mentioned in paragraph 2 of the affidavit between 1991 and 1993 from one Sri Surya Chandar Rao and that when respondent No.2 sought to interfere with their possession of the said plots, they filed the present writ petition. In the counter-affidavit filed along with the vacate stay application, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Quthbullapur, stated that the land in question is covered by assignment pattas and that the petitioners purchased the assigned land from Sri Surya Chandar Rao, who originally purchased the said land from the original assignees in the year 1986. According to the answering respondent, the purchases made by the petitioners are null and void in view of the provisions of Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 (for short, ‘the Act’). In paragraph 8, an averment is, however, made that action is being initiated to evict the petitioners after following due process of law. This statement contained in the counter-affidavit shows that so far the respondents have not followed the procedure prescribed under the provisions of the Act. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of. The respondents are directed not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the plots in possession of the petitioners, without following the procedure prescribed under the Act. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.5270 of 2005 and WVMP.No.639 of 2006 are disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 11.06.2008 ES