THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P.Nos.9947 of 1998 & 24259 of 2002 COMMON ORDER: W.P.No.9947 of 1998 This writ petition is filed seeking a Certiorari to call for the records relating to G.O.Ms.No.75, Social Welfare (F2) Department dated 4.7.1996 and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal. It appears, petitioners’ father late Narasimha Murthy purchased an extent of Ac.9-84 cents in S.No.57/1 of Valsampeta village, Koyyuru mandal, Visakhapatnam district under registered sale deed dated 28.5.1951 bearing document No.1160/51 from one Veeramushti Mallaiah, father of respondent Nos. 4 and 5. According to the petitioners, before transferring the land, the said Veeramushti Mallaiah had obtained necessary permission from the authorities concerned vide proceedings dated 6.8.1932. However, the said sale was the subject matter of L.T.R.No.172 of 1978. The primary authority held that the transaction, which was concluded prior to Regulation 1959, cannot be affected particularly when the Tribal obtained permission for sale of the land. According to the petitioner, after 15 years thereafter, again suo-moto proceedings in L.T.R.No.130 of 1993 were taken up and the primary authority without taking into consideration of the permission obtained by the Tribal on 6.8.1932 for transfer of land, ordered the petition as prayed for. Aggrieved thereby, petitioners carried the matter in appeal before the Agent to the Government. The said Agent has also confirmed the orders of the primary authority. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioners filed revision before the Government and that was also met with the same fate. Hence this writ petition. Though a detailed counter affidavit has been filed by respondents denying the allegations made by the petitioner, the fact that the father of respondents 4 and 5 had taken permission from the authorities on 6.8.1932 and executed registered sale deed in favour of petitioners father on 28.5.1951 was not denied, except saying that the same is hit by Section 4 (1) of Act 1 of 1917. It can be seen from the order passed by the Primary Authority dated 7.11.1978 in L.T.R.No.172 of 1978, wherein the claim of Veeramushti Mallaiah, father of respondents 4 and 5 was rejected by recording a categorical finding that the petitioners have purchased the land under the permission obtained from the Special Assistant Agent, Narsipatnam and hence the sale transaction is not hit by Land Transfer Regulations. After 15 years thereafter, the matter was reopened suo-motu and allowed the claim of Tribal without taking into consideration of the above facts. The said order was confirmed by the appellate authiority as well as by the revisional authority. I am of the considered opinion that before transfer of land, permission as required under law was obtained and registered sale deed was executed in favour of petitioners father on 28.5.1951, therefore it cannot be said that the said transaction is hit by Section 4 (1) of Act 1 of 1917. Under those circumstances, I am of the opinion that the order passed by the primary authority as confirmed by the appellate authority and further confirmed by the revisional authority are not sustainable in law, therefore the same are liable to be set aside. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned orders are set aside. No order as to costs. W.P.No.24259 of 2002 For the principle decided in the above writ petition, this writ petition is also liable to be allowed and accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 2.6.2009 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P.Nos.9947 of 1998 & 24259 of 2002 2.6.2009