THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 2172 OF 2009 ORDER: The 1st petitioner purchased an extent of Ac.19- 32 guntas of land in Survey No.78 of Kotwalguda Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, in the year 1995. Out of the said land, the 2nd petitioner is said to have been granted quarry lease over an extent of one hectare. Alleging that the said land was assigned by the Government to the landless poor, proceedings under Section 3 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’) were initiated. Notice in Form No.1 was issued. Stating that the purchaser failed to submit a reply to show cause notice, the first respondent passed an order dated 27.11.2006 declaring that the sale deeds in respect of Ac.2.33 guntas of land are null and void and directing the resumption of the land to Government. It is stated that the 2nd petitioner could not submit reply to the show cause notice, since he was involved in a criminal case at the relevant point of time and that copy of the impugned order was served upon him recently. It is further stated that the lands in question were declared as surplus under the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 and were allotted by collecting certain amounts, and in that view of the matter, the provisions of the Act do not apply. The petitioners complain that the respondents are taking steps to dispossess them. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The impugned order is passed in exercise of power under Section 3 of the Act. A right of appeal is provided to an affected person. The order was passed more than two years ago. If the plea raised by the petitioners that the order was served upon the 2nd petitioner recently is true, the same deserves to be taken into account in the context of computing the limitation for filing an appeal. Such eventuality arises, if only the petitioners approach the appellate authority. This Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition at this stage. The interest of the petitioners can be protected by directing the maintenance of status-quo for a limited period to enable the petitioners to avail the remedy of appeal. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that it shall be open to the petitioners to approach the appellate authority by preferring an appeal within two weeks from today by explaining the delay in presentation of the same. Status-quo shall be maintained for a period of four weeks. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 09.02.2009 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 2172 OF 2009 Date: 09.02.2009 JSU