IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7668 of 2008 Between: Sutapalli Panduranga Rao S/o. Bakkaiah @ Chinarammayya, Jangareddigudem, W.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Tahsildar R/o. Jangareddygudem, W.G. District. .....RESPONDENT 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 to issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent threatening to dispossess the petitioner in pursuane of Form -II notices dt. 19-2-2008 covered by the extent of Ac 0-95 cts in R.S.No. 185 of the petitioner situated at Jangareddygudem is illegal, arbitrary and violation princples of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the land of the petitioner and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.NARAM.NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7668 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the notice issued by the respondent in Form-II dated 19.2.2008 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be summarily evicted from the land admeasuring Ac.0.95 cents in Survey No. 185, Jangareddigudem village and mandal, West Godavari district, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land and was also granted D-form patta vide proceedings L.D.No.773/93 dated 15.8.1995. While so, he was issued with the impugned notice dated 19.2.2008 calling upon him to explain as to why he should not be evicted for contravention of section 3 (2) of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. The petitioner said to have submitted his explanation dated 20.3.2008 and allege that without considering the same, the respondent is trying to dispossess him from the subject land. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. Both counsel agreed for disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage, with the following direction. Since the petitioner has already submitted his explanation on 20.3.2008, the respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate speaking orders in accordance with law, expeditiously. Till such time, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the subject land. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ____________ N.V.RAMANA,J DATE: 16.4.2008 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7668 of 2008 DATE: 16.4.2008