THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P. No. 25468 of 2007 & W.P.No. 25517 of 2007 Date:18-01-2008 W.P. No. 25468 of 2007 Between: Kambala Lakshmi Koteswari and another …Petitioners AND The District Collector, Manchilipatnam, Krishna District and two others .. Respondents W.P. No. 25517 of 2007 Between: Adapa Koteswara Rao and (11) others …Petitioners AND The District Collector, Manchilipatnam, Krishna District and two others .. Respondents COMMON ORDER: W.P.No.25468 of 2007 is filed by the petitioners seeking to issue a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in declaring their patta lands situated in Sy.Nos.32/5, 33/1B, 33/2, 33/4, 34/1A, 34/3A, 9/ID, 9/1C, 33/1A, 33/6, 33/7 and 33/5 in a total extent of Ac.10.00 cents of Rudrapaka village, Nandivada madnal, Krishna District as assigned lands and passing resumption orders by issuing Proceedings in Rc.No.B.95/2007, dated 12.08.2007 under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 1977 and proposing to dispossess the petitioners from their respective lands without considering the objections raised by them and without conducting any enquiry , as illegal and arbitrary. W.P.No.25517 of 2007 is filed by the petitioners seeking to issue a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in declaring their patta lands as assigned lands and passing resumption orders by issuing Proceedings in Rc.No.B.95/2007, dated 10.08.2007 under A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 1977 and proposing to dispossess them from their respective lands admeasuring Ac.52.41 cents in R.S.No.4/1, 3/1, 3/2, 15/5, 15/8, 15/9, 11, 14/3, 24/4, 14/5, 14/6, 14/7 and 5/6, 4/2, 2/2 and 5/7 respectively situated in Rudrapaka village, Nandivada madnal, Krishna District without considering the objections raised by them and without conducting any enquiry , as illegal and arbitrary and to issue a consequential direction to the respondents not to take any coercive steps including the measures to dispossess the petitioners from their respective lands. It is the case of the petitioners that as against the resumption orders passed by the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, Nandivada, Krishna District in Rc.No.B.95/2007, dated 12.08.2007 and 10.08.2007 respectively, the petitioners have filed the statutory appeals under Section 4-A of A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition and Transfers) Act (for short “the Act”) before the appellate authority i.e. the 2nd respondent-R.D.O., Gudivada. Questioning the said resumption orders, the petitioners along with others have filed W.P.Nos.22941, 22973 and 23020 of 2007 and this Court while disposing of the said writ petitions, directed the appellate authority i.e. R.D.O., Gudiwada to consider and dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioners and pending disposal of the appeals, it was directed to maintain status-quo obtaining as on the date of disposal of the writ petitions with regard to the possession of the respective lands. Insofar as W.P.No.23186 of 2007, dated 02.11.2007 is concerned, it was directed to consider and dispose of the appeals as expeditiously as possible without any unnecessary delay and pending appeal, the petitioners therein shall not be dispossessed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners apprehends that no doubt the appeals are pending before the appellate authority/2nd respondent-R.D.O. In view of the tenor of the remarks submitted by the Tahsildar to the appellate authority, there is a reasonable apprehension to apprehend that without giving any reasonable opportunity to question the orders of the appellate authority, the respondents may dispossess the petitioners. The learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that there is no basis for such an apprehension. In fact, the appeals are still pending on the file of the R.D.O., Gudivada and no orders have been passed so far. Against the orders passed by the appellate authority under Section 4A(1) of the Act, the petitioners are entitled to question the said orders of the appellate authority under Section 4-B of the Act before the District Collector within 90 days from the date of communication of the said orders by the appellate authority. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as the appeals are pending on the file of the 2nd respondent/R.D.O., Gudivada, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of the said appeals filed against the resumption orders of the 3rd respondent after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioners in accordance with law and communicate the same as expeditiously as possible and till the expiry of ten days after the service of the appellate order, they shall not take any coercive steps to interfere or dispossess the petitioners from their lands in any manner for a period of ten days from the date of service of the said orders so as to enable the petitioners to question the said orders of the appellate authority before the Revisional Authority under Section 4-B of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:18.01.2008 Note: Furnish C.C. by tomorrow. B/O ccm