IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18843 of 2008 Between: 1 A. Ramesh Gupta S/o. Rajaiah R/o. Kammaguda Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 2 A. Aruna W/o. A. Ramesh Gupta R/o. Kammaguda Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Collector-1, Ranga Reddy District in the O/o. The Collectorate, Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy District at Mojamjahi Market, Hyderabad. 4 The Mandal Tahsildar, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 5 Hyderabad Metro Water Works & Sewerage Board, Hyderabad, rep. by its Managing Director. .....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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents herein in trying to resume our lands in Sy.No.124/43 (Ac.0.24 guntas), 124/56 (Ac.3.16), 124/57 (Ac.2.02 guntas), 124/58 (Ac. 4.05 guntas) situated at Mangalpally Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District pending revision before the 2nd respondent herein as illegal, improper, unjust and arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents herein to declare the said lands as patta lands. Counsel for the Petitioner:MRS.SUJATHA V. Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent No.5:MR. N. RAJENDRA PRASAD, SC FOR METRO WATER WORKS The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioners claim to have purchased an extent of Ac.10.00 of land in various survey numbers of Mangalpally Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The Tahsildar, Ibrahimpatnam, the 4th respondent herein, initiated proceedings under Section 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’) and a notice was issued on 14.09.2007. The petitioners submitted an explanation. Not being satisfied with the said explanation, the 4th respondent passed an order dated 15.12.2007 directing resumption of land to the Government. The appeal preferred by the petitioners before the first respondent was rejected on 01.02.2008. Thereupon, the petitioners availed the remedy of revision before the second respondent. Their grievance is that even while the revision is pending, respondents 4 and 5 are trying to dispossess them from the land. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The petitioners have availed the statutory remedy of revision under Section 4-B of the Act. In case if the petitioners dispossessed even while the revision is pending, the very purpose of availing the remedy would be defeated. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing that the petitioners shall not be dispossessed from their respective lands during the pendency of the revision filed by them before the second respondent. It is also directed that the second respondent shall issue notice of hearing to the petitioners before he dispose of the revision. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J Date:01.04.2009 sj