The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.23532 of 2010 Date: 22-09-2010 Between: T.Ramulu ..... Petitioner AND The Joint Collector, Mahaboobnagar District and 4 others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.M.Damodar Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP for Revenue Counsel for respondent Nos.4 & 5: ----- Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside order, dated 27-10-2008, of respondent No.1, whereby he has confirmed orders, dated 15-11-2006 and 23-04-2005, passed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 respectively. The petitioner claims to be belonging to the family of the original assignee of land admeasuring Ac.15-39 guntas in Bandameedipally Village of Mahabubnagar Mandal. It is his pleaded case that in the year 1958-59, the said land was assigned in the name of one of his predecessors and that in the partition suit between him and respondent No.5, the said land fell to his share. It is his further case that the father of respondent No.5 has alienated an extent of Ac.3- 00 out of the said land to respondent No.4. Alleging that the said alienation was in violation of the provisions of the A.P.Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’), the petitioner approached respondent No.3- Tahsildar, Mahabubnagar District, for cancellation of assignment and restoration of possession thereof in his favour. The said application was dismissed on 23-04-2005. The petitioner was unsuccessful in his appeal and revision filed against the said order. He has, therefore, filed the present Writ Petition. All the authorities, who rejected the petitioner’s claim for resumption of the land, have consistently found that the assignment was made on payment of 16 times of land revenue prior to issuance of GO.Ms.No.1406, dated 25-07- 1958, under which the maximum extent of assignable land was prescribed as Ac.5-00 dry or Acs.2-20 wet. It was further found that when the land was purchased on payment of upset value in terms of the instructions then prevailing, and in the absence of any condition of non-alienability, the provisions of the Act are not attracted. The petitioner has failed to file a copy of the assignment to substantiate his plea that alienation of any part of the assigned land was in violation of the conditions stipulated therein. In view of his failure to file the same, it is not possible for this Court to interfere with the findings rendered by respondent Nos.1 to 3 that the provisions of the Act are not attracted in the absence of any condition prohibiting alienation contained therein. For the above-mentioned reasons, I do not find any merit in this Writ Petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.30116 of 2010, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 22nd September, 2010 lur