IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 22760 of 2008 Between: 1 Sunshne Fruit Pulupe Industry, rep. by its Managing Partner Mali Reddy Murali Reddy Bethupalli Hamlet, Rallamada Village, Sathupalli Mandal, Khammam District. 2 Mireddy Murali Reddy S/o. Suryanarayana Reddy R/o. H.No. 1-164, Sathupalli Village & Madnal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Khammam District, Khammam. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Khammam District, Khammam 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Sathupalli Mandal, Khammam District. .....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 pass order or orders more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS by declaring the resumption of land by the 4th respondent under the proceedings ROC.No. B-4015/234/2007 dated 25-08-2007 as illegal, arbitrary and opposed to law. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.CH.SHANMUKHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled by the petitioners questioning the order dated 25.8.2007, issued by the 4th respondent – Tahsildar, Sathupalli Mandal of Guntur District resuming the lands of the petitioners under the provisions of Section 4(1)(a) and 4(1)(b) of the A.P.Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 as amended vide Act No.8/2007 (for short ‘the Act’). It is the case of the petitioners that the land in an extent of Ac.5.10 guntas in Sy.No.39 of Siddaram Village of erstwhile Madhira taluka and now Sathupalli Mandal was a government land and loani pattas were issued for the said land in favour of various persons from whom they purchased the lands under registered sale deeds after validating the agreements of sale and the government has also issued certiﬁcates under Section 13(B) of the Records of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act. While so, the impugned order is issued by the 4th respondent seeking to resume the said land for the contravention of the provisions of the Act. Hence this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.1406 dated 25.07.1958 has introduced a clause prohibiting sale of the assigned lands and since the lands in question are assigned in the year 1955 to the original assignees without any prohibition to sell the same, it cannot be said that the petitioners contravened the provisions of the Act and, therefore, the lands are liable to be resumed. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned government pleader, on instructions, submits that inasmuch as the lands in question were assigned in the year 1955, the impugned notice issued under the provisions of 1977 Act has no application since there is no prohibition for alienation of the lands assigned in the year 1955. It is also submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court considered the issue in W.P.No.18270 of 2008 dated 29.8.2008 and W.P.No.19636 of 2008 dated 10.9.2008 and gave a ﬁndings that 1977 Act has no application to the assignments made in the year 1955. Following the aforesaid Judgment in W.P.Nos.18270 and 19636 of 2008 dated 29.8.2008 and 10.9.2008, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.24.10.2008 msv