THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15328 of 2002 Date of Order:10.02.2011 Between: G.Rukminamma ..Petitioner and The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad and others ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15328 of 2002 ORDER :- By means of filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner invoked the Certiorari jurisdiction of this Court for calling up the records of the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad- respondent No.1 in B.C.W.2/123/2000, dated 11.02.2002, confirming the orders of the Joint Collector, Chittoor District-respondent No.2 in proceedings D.Dis.(E3)/19558/98, dated 19.12.1999, and to quash the same. Petitioner, who was a land less poor person and a deserted woman, has been in possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring Acs.4-85 cents situated in Survey No.735/1 of Valasapalli village, which was originally assigned in favour of the husband of the petitioner viz., G.Srinivasulu, who has violated the conditions of the assignment and alienated the land to Smt.M.Narasamma for Rs.3,000/-. The Mandal Revenue Officer-respondent No.3 has resumed the land from the purchaser, restored the same to the petitioner in the year 1987 and granted assignment in her favour vide A.M.No.4/4/1379, dated 29.10.1997. Aggrieved by the grant of patta in favour of the petitioner, one M.Narsamma, W/o.Krishna Murthy of Aravavandlapalli, H/o.Valasapalli village filed an appeal before the Sub-Collector, Madanapalli who by order, dated 18.01.1993, in D.Dis.No.6227/88, dismissed the appeal holding that the survey No.735/1 admeasuring an extent of Acs.4-85 cents of Valasapalli village was re-assigned to Smt.G.Rukminamma (petitioner herein) after cancelling the original assignment made in favour of Sri G.Srinivasulu; that the petitioner/appellant before the Sub-Collector claiming land on the strength of an agreement entered into with the original assignee (first respondent) for the purpose of schedule land which she has not done so; that the sale deed is null and void; that the land is a Government land; that at the time of assignment, the writ petitioner was landless poor and was deserted women and she lived on cultivation of the land and hence, the assignment made in her favour cannot be interfered. No appeal has been preferred against the same to the Collector within 30 days from the date of the said order and the same has become final. Curiously, when the writ petitioner made a representation before respondent No.3, which was transmitted to respondent No.2, seeking protection for peaceful enjoyment of the land on the ground that Narasamma, Krishnamurthy and others were obstructing her peaceful enjoyment and therefore she filed suit in O.S.No.322 of 1987 on the file of I Additional District Judge, which was disposed of in her favour, the Joint Collector after going through the case of the petitioner and other connected records issued the impugned proceedings in D.Dis.(E3)/19558/98, dated 19.12.1999, cancelling the assignment made in favour of the petitioner holding that it is under mistakes of fact under BSO 15(18) read with G.O.Ms.No.(Rev.), dated 02.08.1985; that the inspection report of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Madanapalli revealed that the assignee is residing at Madanapalli and no land is under her cultivation and out of the extent of Acs.1-80 cents, Ch.Lakshmamma was in possession of Acs.0-99 cents and Poola Lakshmamma was in possession of Acs.0-81 cents; that since the assignee is residing at Madanapalle town and since three years the assignee is cultivating the land; that the encroachers belongs to Backward caste community and they are eligible for assignment and, accordingly, cancelled the assignment made in favour of the petitioner. On appeal being filed, respondent No.1 after hearing the arguments and perusing the connected records dismissed the appeal holding that the appellant failed to produce any recorded evidence substantiating the grounds of appeal. Hence, the writ petition. In the proceedings, dated 18.01.1993, passed by the Sub-Collector, a detailed order has been passed after recording the arguments and evidence. When the petitioner filed representation that she filed a suit and obtained an injunction against the encroachers and asked for protecting her possession, the Revenue Divisional Officer in his letter, dated 28.06.1997, directed the Mandal Revenue Officer to show the boundaries of the assigned land and to extend the police protection to the petitioner at the time of cultivation of the land and send compliance report, which clearly goes to show that the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the land, which was accepted by the civil court in granting injunction in her favour in O.S.No.322 of 1987. In view of the same, the cancellation of the assignment made on the ground that the encroachers are in occupation of the land is contrary to the injunction granted in favour of the petitioner and it is nothing but protecting the encroachers who are injuncted while interfering with the possession of the petitioner. Respondents have not filed any counter in support of the orders passed by respondent Nos.1 and 2. In view of the same, the impugned orders passed by the Joint Collector as confirmed by the Commissioner, Appeals, are set aside. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J February 2, 2011 Lmv