THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14819 of 2008 ORDER: Although the matter is listed under the caption ‘interlocutory’, at the request of the learned counsel on either side, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for hearing and being disposed of by this order. This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus by way of directions to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from land admeasuring Ac.0.51 cents covered by R.S.No.176/2 of Krishna Rao Palem Village (Cheemalpadu Village), A.Konduru Mandal, Krishna District. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the owner and possessor of aforesaid land having purchased it from its earlier owner by registered sale deed, dated 18.11.2006 vide document No.4514 of 2006. It is her further case that her vendor Smt. P.Susheelamma has purchased the said land from her predecessors-in-title, Sri Ch.Chennaiah and Ch.Venkateshwara Rao. It is also her case that she was issued pattadar pass books and title deeds and in spite of the same, the respondents without any authority of law and jurisdiction are trying to dispossess her from the said land. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by the third respondent – Tahsildar, A.Konduru Mandal, Krishna District. In the counter-affidavit, it is stated that originally, the land in question was assigned to Smt. Chalamala Lakshmi Devi, Wife of Chennaiah and as it was found to be in possession of the petitioner in contravention of sub-section 2 of Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’), notice was issued and thereafter, final order was passed on 26.09.2007 in proceedings No.08/07 under Section 4(1)(a) of the Act. It is also stated that the Additional Revenue Inspector, A.Konduru had taken possession of the land in question on 30.09.2007 by conducting a panchanama. In this Writ Petition, it is submitted by Sri V.S.R.Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was not put on notice at any point of time and even, final order passed on 26.09.2007 is not served on her. On the other hand, it is stated that final order passed under the provisions of the Act is not challenged, as such, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in the Writ Petition. Although it is pleaded that order of resumption, dated 26.09.2007 in proceedings No.08/07, was passed without following due procedure, under the scheme of the Act, against the orders of the primary authority, there is a right of appeal to the appellate authority i.e. Revenue Divisional Officer and further, revision to the Joint Collector. As much as order, dated 26.09.2007 passed in proceedings No.08/07 is not under challenge and in view of the plea of the petitioner that such order is not served on her, I deem it appropriate to permit her to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority, within a period of two (2) months from today. It is open to the petitioner to obtain a copy of the said order from the primary authority. If such appeal is filed within the aforesaid period, the appellate authority shall entertain the same without raising any objection with regard to limitation, consider it and pass appropriate orders. Further, there shall be a direction to the respondents to maintain status quo obtaining as on today with regard to possession, for a period of two (2) months. It is open to the petitioner to obtain appropriate interim orders in the appeal filed by her before the appellate authority. Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 9th AUGUST, 2011. kvni