IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 17418 of 2008 Between: Suthapalli Panduranga Rao S/o. Late Bakkaiah R/o.D.No. 23/118, Veerodulavari Street, Butaigudam Road, Ashok Nagar, Jagareddygudem (Village) Mandal, W.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Govt. of A.P. rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Revenue Department (Assignment), Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Tahsildar, Jangareddygudem, West Godavari District. 3 Smt. Dasari Varalakshmi, W/o. Late Peddi Raju R/o. Salipeta, Jangareddygudem, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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, order or direction more appropriately one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by calling for the records relating to the imugned orders issued by the 2nd respondent in Roc.No.116/2008 (A) dt. 16.04.2008 signed on 15.04.2008 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, biased, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MS.V.VIDYULALATHA DASYAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 17418 of 2008 Oral order: Assailing the orders dated 16.04.2008, passed by the 2nd respondent, namely the Tahsildar, Jangareddygudem, West Godavari District, restoring the land in question in favour of the 3rd respondent, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. According to the petitioner, the impugned order was not communicated to him, and only when he approached the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, the copy of said order was served on him. However, when the matter is taken up for admission today, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and admitted to by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as against the impugned order dated 16.04.2008, passed by the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, remedy of appeal, under Section 4-A of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, is available to the petitioner, before the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: The petitioner is directed to avail the remedy of appeal available to him under Section 4-A of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, against the impugned order dated 16.04.2008, passed by the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, before the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned, within a period of four weeks from today. Till such time, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by the parties. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 11.08.2008 Nsr