THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3002 of 2009 ORDER: The Tahsildar, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, the fourth respondent herein, initiated proceedings under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act 1977 (for short ‘the Act’) in respect of Acs.10.00 of land in Survey No.108 of Tondupally Village, Rajendranagar Mandal and an order, dated 15.04.2006, was passed directing resumption. The fifth respondent herein filed an appeal before the Revenue Division Officer, Chevella Division, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga District, the third respondent herein. The appeal was dismissed on 20.06.2007 and thereupon, the fifth respondent filed a revision before the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, the second respondent herein. Claiming interest in that very property, the petitioners herein filed an application before the second respondent with a prayer to implead them as parties to the revision. Through the order, dated 02.12.2008, the second respondent dismissed the application. Hence, this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, and the learned counsel for the fifth respondent, who filed caveat. While rejecting the application filed by the petitioners, the second respondent left it open to them to work out their remedies by approaching the civil Court. Such a course would have been proper in case the proceedings before him were under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. The very basis for the present set of proceedings is the allegation that there is a transfer of assigned land, contrary to the provisions of the Act. The question as to whether the land partake the character of assigned land and if so, who are the actual transferees and who feels the immediate impact of cancellation of such sales, needs to be examined. Not only the persons who have purchased the land, but also those in possession and enjoyment become necessary parties to such proceedings. The adjudication before the second respondent would be comprehensive and complete in case the petitioners are also permitted to participate. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Consequently, the petitioners shall stand impleaded in the revision filed by the fifth respondent before the second respondent. It hardly needs any emphasis that the second respondent shall take into account the contentions put forward by all the parties before him. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:18.02.2009 kdl