THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.12457 of 2006 ORDER: This writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “For the reasons stated above, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus ro any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction of the like nature: Declaring the impugned proceedings No.BCW/4/95/98 dated 28-04-2004 of the firs respondent dismissing the Revision Petition filed by the Petitioner Company while confirming the orders of Joint Collector i.e., the second respondent passed in Order No.J/110/ASN/95/2947/95 dated 08.01.1998 and also eviction Notice No.B/2542/94 dated 14-12-1994 of the third respondent as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and void ab initio.” At the first instance, petitioner was given notice, dated 14.12.1994 in Proceedings No.B/2542/94 under Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 1977, framed under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, directing it to show cause why it should not be summarily evicted from the land in question. As against the same, the petitioner preferred appeal and further carried the matter under revision and the said notice was confirmed. It is to be noticed that after submission of explanation by the petitioner in reply to the impugned notice, a final order was passed by the third respondent –Tahsildar, Jinnaram Mandal, Medak District, on 05.01.1995 in proceedings bearing No.B/2542/1994. As the final order of eviction was passed after considering the explanation of the petitioner, there is no reason to seek to adjudicate the validity of the show cause notice as all the proceedings were arising out of show cause notice, dated 14.12.1994, which is impugned in this writ petition, as such, I do not find any illegality in the said show cause notice issued in proceedings No.B/2542/1994, which was confirmed by the appellate and revisional authorities. However, as much as it is stated that the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser and made constructions on the land in question, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to question order, dated 05.01.1995 passed by the third respondent in proceedings No.B/2542/1994, before the appellate authority, within a period of two (2) months from today. Pending further orders, there shall be a direction to the respondents to maintain status quo obtaining as on today for a period of two (2) months. It is made clear that it is open to the petitioner to obtain appropriate orders from the appellate authority. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 10th JUNE, 2011. kvni