IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7455 of 1999 Between: Bollareddi Karunakara Murali Krishnareddy S/o Prasadreddy Darbhagudem Village, Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Special Deputy Collecter(Tribunal Welfare) Kota Ramachandrapuram, West Godavari District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Jeelugumilli Mandal, 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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in ordering ejectment by his order in S.R.No.182/97 dt 30-11- 1998 as illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction and un-constitutional and consequently direct the respondents not to implement the ordr in S.R.No.182/97 dt.30-11-1998 passed by the 1st respondent and not to dispossess the petitioner from the lands in R.S.No.265/1 extent of Ac.10.91 cents and R.S.No.207/P an extent of Ac.8.50 cents of Darbhagudem Village Jeelugumilli Mandal, W.G.District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.B.RAM MOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.7455 of 1999 ORDER: The Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Kota Ramachandrapuram, West Godavari- first respondent herein initiated proceedings under the A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1/59, as amended by Regulation 1/70 (for short ‘the Regulation”) in respect of about Ac.25.00 of land in Survey Nos. 207/P, 208 and 265/1 of Darbhagudem Village in Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District. It was alleged that the purchase made by the petitioner or his predecessor in title is in contravention of the provisions of the Regulation. On receipt of the notice, the petitioner filed reply stating that on earlier occasion proceedings in S.R.Nos. 282 and 286 of 1992 were initiated by the Special Deputy Collector in respect of Ac 41.86 cents of land including the lands, now being proceeded against and through an order dated 13.4.1995 the proceedings were dropped on finding that they are not covered by the Regulation. The first respondent passed an order, dated 30.11.1998 directing resumption of the lands of the petitioner, initiating proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Regulation. The same is challenged by the petitioner. It is contended that the same authority, namely Special Deputy Collector had examined the matter with reference to the lands in S.R.No.282 and 286 of 1992 and though the same was brought to his notice, he ignored it. Heard Sri C.B.Mohan Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare. On receiving notice in S.R.No.182 of 1997 from the first respondent, the petitioner entered appearance. His principal contention was that the subject matter of S.R. No.182 of 1997 is covered by the order of the first respondent in S.R.Nos.282 and 286 of 1992. In fact, this was referred to in the impugned order dated 30.11.1998. The first respondent discussed the matter with reference to the order in S.R.Nos.282 and 286 of 1992. However, there is no specific finding as to whether the lands, which are subject of matter of S.R.No.182 of 1997, are in any way different from those in S.R.Nos.282 and 286 of 1992. Once the proceedings were initiated against the petitioner by the first respondent in the year 1992, and an order was passed in relation thereto, the first respondent does not have the jurisdiction to deal with the same lands in the proceedings under the very provisions. In case, the proceedings are sought to be initiated in respect of different lands not covered by S.R.Nos.282 and 286 of 1992, the first respondent would certainly have jurisdiction. The impugned order dated 30.11.1998 is not clear on this aspect. Normally the petitioner is required to avail remedy before the Agent to the Government. However, in view of the fact that verification of lands is necessary, it must be dealt with by the first respondent himself. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set-aside. The matter is remanded to the first respondent, who in turn shall verify as to whether the lands mentioned in the schedule to the impugned order are covered by the order dated 13.4.1995 in S.R Nos.282 and 286 of 1992. It is also directed that the first respondent shall not have jurisdiction to deal with any lands that are covered by order in S.R.Nos.282 and 286 of 1992 and it shall be open to him to proceed against any lands not covered by the said order. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 8.12.2008 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VEENA}