IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 810 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 04/11/2008 in WP NO : 5001 OF 2004 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Parimi Surya Rao son of Somanna Surapuvari Gudem H/o Buttaigudem V& M West Godavari Dist ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Prl.Secretary to the Govt Social Welfare (LTR-I) Department AP. Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 District Collector Agent to the Govt of AP West Godavari Dist 3 The Speical Dy Colelctor, Tribal Welfare, K.KPuram , West Godavari Dist 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer (Presently Tahsildar) Buttaigudem Village and Mandal West Godavari Dist 5 Daid Narayana Swamy son of Govindu Akampallem V & M West Godavari Dist .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant:MR.P.JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI A N D THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 810 of 2009 J U D G M E N T : (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meenakumari) This Writ Appeal assails the order dated 04.11.2008 made in W.P.M.P. No. 20489 of 2008 in W.P. No. 5001 of 2004 by a learned Single Judge whereby the petition filed seeking to condone the delay of 323 days in filing the restoration petition, was dismissed. 2. The appellant herein filed the above writ petition challenging G.O. Ms. No. 41 dated 9.4.1996 issued by the Government whereby the revision filed by the appellant herein was rejected by the Government on the ground that the transactions took place from the tribes to non-tribes between the period from 11.9.59 to 8.10.1963 when the Land Transfer Regulation was very much in vogue without obtaining permission in writing from the Agent to the Government and, therefore, the two transactions cannot be sheltered under the judgments dated 18.9.19985 of the Supreme Court in CA No. 6 of 1995, 8422 of 1995 arising out of SLP No. 10746 of 1981, whereunder it was held that the provisions of Land Transfer Regulation shall operative prospectively and shall have no retrospective effect. The said writ petition was dismissed for non- prosecution/default on 2.8.2007 by the learned Single Judge observing that though the matter had been coming for final hearing for the last one month, but when it was called, the learned counsel for the appellant was absent. Seeking to set aside the said dismissal order, the appellant herein filed WPMP(SR) 81893 of 2008 and also filed WPMP No. 20489 of 2008 seeking to condone the delay of 323 days in filing restoration petition, which was dismissed by the order impugned in this Writ Appeal. 3. It is case of the appellant that when his counsel was arguing in the other court, the above writ petition was called and eventually dismissed for non-prosecution/default and since he being aged 85 years, could not contact his counsel immediately and thus there occurred a delay of 323 days in filing the petition to restore the above writ petition. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare and Mr. V.Venugopal Rao, learned counsel for the Respondent No.5. 5. As can be seen from the facts and circumstance of the case, since the appellant is aged 85 years, he could not immediately contact his counsel to file the present petition, we deem it just and proper to condone the delay in filing the restoration petition. 6. Consequently, the Writ Appeal is allowed. No order as to costs. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 18-6-2009. I s L