IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23350 of 2010 Between: Golla Linganna ..... Petitioner AND The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, Kurnool District & another. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri O. Manohar Reddy Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23350 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not granting ‘D’ form patta in respect of land admeasuring Ac.0.54 cents and Ac.0.46 cents in Sy.Nos.220/A1 and 289/A2 respectively of Gudikallu Village, Yemmiganur Mandal, Kurnool District, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner’s father claims to be a landless poor person and was in possession of the abovementioned land under Eksal patta granted in the year 1971. After the death of his father, the petitioner claims to be in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said land from the year 1998. The petitioner pleaded that on several occasions he has approached respondent No.2 for grant of assignment, as directed in the Eksal patta as far back as the year 1971 and without granting such assignment, respondent No.2 is seeking to assign the said land to the third parties. At the hearing, Sri O. Manohar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterated the pleas raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. Though the petitioner has claimed that he made several representations, no details thereof have been mentioned in the affidavit nor copies of the purported representations have been filed by him. In the absence of any evidence in this regard, it is not possible for this Court to give a positive direction to respondent No.2. The petitioner is therefore permitted to make a detailed representation to respondent No.2 within a period of four weeks from today and on such representation being made, respondent No.2 shall dispose of the same. Till such disposal of the petitioner’s representation, respondent No.2 shall not assign the land in question to the third parties. Subject to the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.29870 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 21.09.2010 ES