HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITON No. 1481 OF 2009 DATED 29TH JANUARY, 2010. BETWEEN Muddana Satyanarayan (died) and ors ….Petitioners and State of AP, rep. By its Authorized Officer, Land Reforms Tribunal, amalapuram and anr. …..Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITON No. 1481 OF 2009 ORDER This revision by third parties is ﬁled against the order dated 19.01.2004 passed in L.R.A.No. 4 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Kakinada, East Godavari District, conﬁrming the order dated 27.4.2002 passed in LCC Nos. 1053,1618/APM/75 by the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer & Land Reforms Tribunal, Amalapuram, rejecting the objections ﬁled by the petitioners/third parties and accepting the land surrendered by the declarant. The second respondent-declarant was declared as surplus land holder to the extent of 0.2586 Standard Holdings and on ﬁnalisation of the proceedings, he ﬁled a required statement for surrendering the lands. On ﬁling such statement, when notice was published by the Tribunal, objections were received from the third parties stating that they have purchased the said lands from the declarant. Aggrieved by the rejection of the objections by the Tribunal, they carried the matter in appeal in L.R.A.Nos. 83 to 87 of 1994, which were dismissed by the appellate Tribunal. Against the dismissal of the said appeals, the third parties ﬁled CRP.Nos. 5183 and 5185 of 1994 before this Court. At this stage, the declarant ﬁled second surrender statement on 9.5.1994 oﬀering certain lands and excluded the lands which he sold to the third parties- revision petitioners. Pursuant to the same, this Court disposed of the aforesaid revisions by common order dated 26.9.1994 and directed the lower Tribunal to consider the same. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the primary Tribunal accepted the second surrender statement of the declarant and issued publication in Form-VIII, to which, the petitioners ﬁled objections accepting the lands as surrendered by the declarant and contending that in the ﬁrst surrender statement, the lands purchased by them were not shown, but included the same in the second surrender statement. The lower Tribunal rejected the said objections observing that since the petitioners purchased the lands subsequent to 01.01.1975, the same are void and therefore notice need not be given to the parties and providing of equity relief under Rule 7(5) of the AP Land Reforms (COAH) Rules does not arise. The lower Tribunal approved the surrender of the lands by the declarant. Questioning the same, the petitioners herein ﬁled appeal in LRA.No. 4 of 2002 and the lower appellate Tribunal after due consideration of the contentions and material on record dismissed the appeal holding that any alienations made subsequent to the notiﬁed date and without sanction of the authorities under Sections 17 or 19 of the A.P. Land Reforms Act are void and the third parties/petitioners who had purchased the lands from the declarant have to face the consequences. It is not in dispute that the petitioners having purchased the property after the notiﬁed date cannot acquire any right over the schedule property and they cannot maintain objections against the surrender made by the declarant inasmuch as their purchase after the notiﬁed date hit the provisions of the A.P. Land Reforms Act. In that view of the matter, I do not see any reason warranting interference with the order under revision. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ---------------------------------------- JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY DATED 29T H JANUARY, 2010. MSNR.