THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.7143 of 2010 01.04.2010 Between: D.Chanchu Raghava Raju ….Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.7143 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner’s father statedly purchased land admeasuring Acs.2.60 in survey No.162/1 and Acs.2.66 in survey No.162/3 of Karuru Village, Pichatur Mandal in Chittoor District under registered sale deed dated 17.10.1969 from Ragaiah and Venkata Swamy. After demise of father in 1993, petitioner succeeded to the property and in possession of the property. It appears respondents 2 and 3 also issued pattadar pass books and title deeds in 1997 in favour of petitioner. Be that as it is, third respondent initiated action under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (the Act, for brevity) and issued notice in Form-I and II under Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 2007 (the Rules, for brevity). It is alleged in the notice dated 16.04.2007, that the petitioner is in possession of assigned land in contravention of Section 3(2) of the Act. Petitioner submitted explanation. According to the petitioner, enquiry is pending before third respondent. In the meanwhile, it is alleged that third respondent is interfering with petitioner’s rights alleging that he contravened the provisions of the Act. Therefore, petitioner filed instant writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of third respondent in interfering with petitioner’s possession is illegal and arbitrary. After getting instructions, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that third respondent passed orders on 25.03.2010 under Section 4 of the Act resuming the land to the Government for contravention of the provisions of the Act. Counsel for petitioner disputes this and submits that so far petitioner has not received any copy of the order. The writ petition was filed on 29.03.2010, whereas as submitted by learned Assistant Government Pleader, third respondent passed orders on 25.03.2010. Therefore, in all probability, the said order would not have been served on petitioner. Against any order passed by Tahsildar under Section 4 of the Act, an appeal lies to Revenue Divisional Officer within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Till the expiry of appeal time, third respondent should not interfere with the possession of petitioner, if he is in possession. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing third respondent to serve copy of resumption order on the petitioner forthwith. Petitioner is given liberty to approach third respondent with a copy of this order and obtain copy of the order passed by him. After doing so, the petitioner may file appeal before second respondent immediately and obtain necessary orders. The appeal shall be disposed of within eight weeks thereafter. Needless to mention till the expiry of appeal time, petitioner’s possession shall not be disturbed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 01.04.2010 Pln