HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4179 OF 2010 Date: 11.08.2010 Between: Papu Sumana & others. … Petitioners And The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kavali, Nellore District & others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4179 of 2010 ORDER: Though interlocutory matters are listed for hearing, at the request of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and is being disposed of. In this writ petition, the petitioners seek for a declaration by way of Mandamus, declaring that they are entitled for assignment of land in Survey No.492 of Gogulapalli village of Allur Mandal in Potti Sreeramulu Nellore District. The petitioners claim that they belong to Scheduled Caste community and are landless poor persons and that they are in possession of land to an extent of Ac.2.50 cents, Ac.2.16 cents, Ac.2.50 cents, Ac.2.00 cents and Ac.2.50 cents respectively, in Survey No.492 of Gogulapalli village. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioners that as much as the said land is a vacant land belonging to the Government, and as the petitioners are landless poor persons, and further, as they are in possession of the land, they are entitled for grant of pattas. Expecting their eviction from the land in question, this writ petition is filed. Counter affidavits are filed by the Government as well as the impleaded respondents. In the counter affidavit filed by the Government, it is stated that one Sri Nukalapati Lakshmi Reddy S/o.Venkateswara Reddy of Allurpeta village, was the declarant under Section 8(1) of the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, and at first instance, he was found to be an excess land holder to an extent of Ac.22.73 cents, but ultimately, when the said orders were confirmed by the appellate authority, declarants carried the matter in appeal in C.R.P.No.1819 of 1984, and this Court has set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the Primary Tribunal for fresh consideration. It is stated that the Primary Tribunal, by an order, dated 27.10.1989, confirmed the earlier orders, holding that the declarant is an excess land holder to an extent of 0.6824 standard holdings. It is further stated that as against the said order, the legal heirs of the declarant have filed an appeal in L.R.A.No.2 of 2001 before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, which has allowed the appeal, by setting aside the order of the Primary Tribunal. It is stated that in view of the judgment of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal in L.R.A.No.2 of 2001, which is decided in favour of the legal heirs of the declarant, matter is under inquiry before the primary authority. It is stated that an extent of land admeasuring Ac.17.71 cents was taken possession pursuant to the orders of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, dated 30th of April 2001, and the petitioners have encroached into the said land. In the counter, it is further stated that the order of the Land Reforms Authority is already set aside in the appeal preferred in L.R.A.No.2 of 2001. In similar lines, is also the counter filed by the legal heirs of the declarant. Although it is the case of the petitioners that the land in question is Government land and the petitioners are entitled for grant of pattas, but it has to be noticed that the land was taken possession by the Government only pursuant to the orders passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, wherein, it was declared that the declarants were holding excess land of 0.6824 standard holdings. It is to be noticed that again in the 2nd round of litigation also, the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal has allowed the appeal by setting aide the order of the primary authority. Although it is pleaded that the land was taken possession by the Government pursuant to the order of the primary authority, but in view of the allowing of appeal, the Government cannot continue possession also. In that view of the matter, in any event, by virtue of the orders passed by the appellate authority, unless further inquiry is conducted and orders are passed, it cannot be treated as excess land of the declarant. As much as the said land is reverted back by virtue of the appellate authority in L.R.A.No.2 of 2001, as of now, the said land cannot be treated as Government land for the purpose of considering the request of the petitioners for grant of pattas. In view of the said position, no direction can be granted as prayed for in this writ petition. Further more, it is also to be noticed that pursuant to the earlier orders, which were set aside by the appellate authority, no pattas were granted to the petitioners. It is stated in the counter filed by the Government that the petitioners have encroached into the land in question and in view of allowing of the appeal filed by the legal heirs of the declarant and allowing of the appeal by the Appellate Tribunal, no directions can be granted as prayed for. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 11th August 2010 ajr