IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 17229 of 2008 Between: Sri Kapuganti Venkata Rao, S/o. late Sanyasi Raju, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Agency Divisional Officer & Special Deputy Collector, (T/W) Paderu (Prescribed Officer), Visakhapatnam 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 issue any writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned notice in L.T.R.No.28/2008, dated 22.08.2008 and proposed to conduct summary enquiry on 08-08-2008 in pursuance of the said notice by the respondent regarding petitioners house and Kirana House therein, in an extent Ac.0.04 cents Main Road, Araku Valley, Visakhapatnam District is illegal and suﬀering from inherent lack of jurisdiction under Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 and attempting and threatening him by the respondent from 05-08-2008 and insisting to vacate the house even before the purported enquiry due to local inﬂuences is also illegal and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to set aside the said notice or to pass any other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.N.(P).ANJANA DEVI, SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 17229 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been ﬁled by Kapuganti Venkata Rao assailing the notice issued in Form No.1 as provided under Rule 7(2) of A.P. Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970 directing him to be present for hearing on 8-8-2008. 2. When the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare received notice. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is threat of dispossession of the petitioner pending enquiry before the respondent, and therefore, the petitioner approached this Court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. The very fact that proceedings have been initiated under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970 indicates that the petitioner is in possession of the land and he will be dispossessed only after passing the orders in LTR No. 28 of 2008. Therefore, the apprehension of the petitioner that he is likely to be dispossessed before conclusion of the enquiry have no basis. Form No.1 issued to the petitioner is explicit that he is required to be present for hearing on 8-8-2008 at 11-00 a.m. The petitioner has to appear before the respondent who is conducting enquiry under the provisions of A.P. Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended by 1 of 1970 and put forth his case. Such is the situation, the apprehension of the petitioner that he is likely to be dispossessed pending enquiry has no merits. 6. Accordingly this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________________ Justice B.Seshasayana Reddy 7th August, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 17229 OF 2008 7th August, 2008.