THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.1672 of 2003 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) This is an Appeal by third parties to the Writ Petition, filed with the leave of this Court. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 had filed the Writ Petition for a direction to respondent Nos.3 to 5 herein not to dispossess them from their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands in Sy.Nos.96-2 and 96-3 of Kollayavalasa Village, Poosapatirega Mandal, Vizianagaram District. The Writ Petition was filed on the ground that respondent Nos.1 and 2 were in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property on the basis of D-form pattas granted in their favour by the revenue authorities; on the basis of which pattadar pass books were also issued and respondent Nos.2 and 3 in the Writ Petition without issuing any proceedings and without cancelling D-form pattas were trying to evict them. Though the Writ Petition was filed in 1999 and was disposed of in 2002, no counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the official respondents therein, a scenario not unusual for the State. In the circumstances, the learned Single Judge disposed of the Writ Petition observing that the official respondents are restrained from dispossessing respondent Nos.1 and 2 from the land in question which were assigned by the Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam on 22.01.1976 as long as the pattas in their favour were not cancelled, after following the due procedure in law. The appellants herein admit that the schedule property was assigned in favour of respondent Nos.1 and 2 (writ petitioners) but since they violated the conditions of assignment, the Mandal Revenue Officer after following the due procedure of law resumed the property in favour of the government by proceedings dated 08.03.1990 and, thereafter, D-form patts in respect of the same property were granted in their favour. The appellants claim to be in possession after such assignment but since, consequent on the judgment in the Writ Petition, respondent Nos.1 and 2 were trying to dispossess them, they filed this appeal with the leave of the Court. At long last, the official respondents have filed a counter affidavit to the averments, in this appeal. The Tahsildar, Poosapatirega Mandal, Vizianagaram District, in his counter affidavit, admits that respondent Nos.1 and 2 were assigned the lands in 1976; but states that since they were alienated in favour of one Duvvu Ramulu in contravention of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 by violating the conditions of D-form patta, a show cause notice was issued on 20.05.1989 to persons who were in possession viz. the alienees; that they were served notice on 29.06.1989 and since the alienees did not file any reply, orders were passed on 08.03.1990 resuming the land and assuming possession on 15.06.1990. Thereafter, the land was assigned to other scheduled caste beneficiaries in 1990 itself, to the appellants herein. Though this counter affidavit is equivocal on whether respondent Nos.1 and 2 (writ petitioners) were issued and served notice proposing cancellation of assignment, From the refusal to categorically state the relevant facts in the counter affidavit, it must be compellingly inferred that neither notices were addressed nor served on the assignees/writ petitioners. The orders of cancellation/termination of assignments are thus a nullity and the still born orders of the Mandal Revenue Officer would be of no legal consequence, including the ability to confer any rights of assignment in favour of the appellants. The order of the learned Single Judge is very clear and categorical viz. that respondent Nos.1 and 2 (writ petitioners) shall not be dispossessed as long as the assignments in their favour are subsisting and unless the assignment is cancelled by following the due process of law. Since admittedly the due process of law was not followed, there is no cancellation of assignment of schedule property in favour of respondent Nos.1 and 2 (writ petitioners), which is operative and valid. In the facts and circumstances above, there are no merits. The Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. In the circumstances without costs. GODA RAGHURAM,J P.DURGA PRASAD, J Date:13.07.2011 usd