THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10040 of 2010 April 28, 2010 Between: Sri Moola (Palle) Agamaiah … Petitioner And The Revenue Divisional Officer & others ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10040 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is allegedly owner of land admeasuring Ac.1.30 gts. in survey No.131 situated at Bahadurpally Village, Quthbullapur Mandal of Ranga Reddy District. His vendor K.Bakkaiah obtained the land by way of patta from Tahasildar. Be that as it is, the third respondent initiated action under Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, (the Act, for brevity). By order in proceedings No.A/3513/2005, dated 25.04.2005, the land was resumed from the petitioner for contravention of Section 4 (1) of the Act on the ground that he purchased assigned land. The petitioner then filed an appeal before the first respondent and also sought stay, in vain. The petitioner, therefore, filed Writ Petition No.15836 of 2005. The same was disposed of by this Court on 26.07.2005 giving liberty to the petitioner to submit explanation to the second respondent, who was directed to pass appropriate orders. The petitioner alleges that he accordingly filed explanation on 19.08.2005. It is also his case that he also submitted an application on 12.03.2007 to the District Collector to regularize the occupation and issue re-assignment patta. On 19.11.2007, the first respondent allegedly closed the appeal. It is further alleged that second respondent did not conduct any enquiry after receiving explanation. Respondents 2 and 3 are threatening to dispossess the petitioner. They also asked him to vacate the land, so that, it may be given to the authorities of Andhra Pradesh Rajeev Swagruha Corporation Limited (APRSCL). Therefore, he filed the instant writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner vehemently submits that after the order of this Court in W.P.No.15836 of 2005, the petitioner submitted his explanation before the second respondent in August, 2005. There is no enquiry, but there is a threat of dispossession of the petitioner. Per contra the Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana Area) obtained instructions. He also placed certain documents. He submits that the order, dated 25.04.2005, preceded by notice was affixed at the land of the petitioner as he refused to receive the notice and did not allow to affix the notice to his house. He also submits that the second respondent under cover of a panchanama, dated 08.06.2005, taken the possession of the land and entrusted to the Village Secretary for custody. He submits that the petitioner is not in possession of the land. He also submits that after taking possession, the land was handed over to the authorities of APRSCL in the year 2007. This Court has perused the documents filed by the petitioner and the Assistant Government Pleader respectively. Irrespective of the orders passed by this Court, the petitioner was dispossessed on 08.06.2005 under cover of panchanama. According to the Assistant Government Pleader, the land was handed over to APRSCL in the year 2007 itself. Thus, the petitioner approached this Court belatedly. Further, even according to the petitioner, the appeal filed by him before the Revenue Divisional Officer was closed and thereafter he submitted an application for regularization and re-assignment. From this itself, an inference can be drawn that the petitioner has made incorrect allegations. If the application of the petitioner before the District Collector is pending, the same may be considered for assignment of land, if the petitioner is eligible. In this writ petition no relief can be granted. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) April 28, 2010 SUR