THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.5748 of 2010 12.03.2010 Between: Maulana Minorities Welfare and Educational Society, Rep.by its Secretary & Correspondent Smt K.Praveena ….Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its District Collector, Kadapa District, Kadapa and others. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.5748 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is registered under Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001. It runs Global College of Engineering and Technology in Chinnamachupalli of Chennur Mandal in Kadapa District. An extent of Acs.5.35 cents in survey No.440 of the said village (hereafter called, petition schedule land) was purchased by petitioner under two registered sale deeds, dated 06.05.2006 and 29.05.2006 from M/s.Maruthi Educational Society and New Rayalaseema Educational Society respectively. The title of the vendor is also traced in the affidavit but it is not necessary to refer to the same. It is the case of the petitioner that third respondent initiated action under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (the Act, for brevity) on the allegation that petitioner is in occupation of assigned land. Notices dated 24.11.2006 in Form-I was issued to original assignees (transferees), namely, K.Moulali Saheb, S/o Hussain and S.Moulali, S/o Leela Appaji, under Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 1977 (the Rules, for brevity). The name of the petitioner was also mentioned in both the notices. In the notice issued to Moulali Saheb, the extent was mentioned as Acs.3.50 cents and in the other notice, the extent was mentioned as Acs.1.85 cents. Both are comprised in survey No.440. The petitioner allegedly submitted explanation on 08.12.2006 alleging that the land in their possession is private patta land and that the Act and Rules have no application. On 23.03.2007, the petitioner represented by its Secretary and Correspondent K.Moulali Saheb, S/o Hussain Saheb filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction alleging that respondents 1 and 3 herein attempted to interfere with the possession. The same being O.S.No.73 of 2007 was decreed ex parte on 12.12.2007. The petitioner at that stage desired to submit an application to All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for necessary approval to expand the educational institutions. One of the requirements therefor is submission of Land Conversion Certificate. The petitioner allegedly made an application dated 27.01.2010 to second respondent for Land Conversion Certificate under Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006. The second respondent allegedly refused Land Conversion Certificate. Admittedly for the reason that the proceedings under the Act were pending finalisation. Therefore, W.P.No.1737 of 2010 was filed for writ of Mandamus, for declaration and direction to issue Land Conversion Certificate in respect of petition schedule land. The petitioner contended that though notice was issued under the Act, no final orders were passed. It was submitted on behalf of the respondents that the final order was passed on 09.02.2010 and that a copy thereof was furnished to petitioner institution. By an order dated 18.02.2010, this Court recorded the submission made by respondents and closed the writ petition giving liberty to petitioner to pursue the remedies in accordance with law. Thereafter alleging that the proceedings dated 28.12.2006 of third respondent under Section 4(1)(a) of the Act resuming the assigned land to Government was served on 18.02.2010, the petitioner filed instant writ petition assailing the orders of the third respondent passed on 28.12.2006. This Court heard the counsel for petitioner and Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignment). The petitioner makes an attempt to submit that no order was passed on 28.12.2006 under Section 4(1)(a) of the Act. The submission, however, cannot be considered in view of the earlier order of this Court, dated 18.02.2010 which has become final. Be it noted that therein this Court agreeing with the submission of the Government Pleader that an order was passed on 28.12.2006, a copy which was already served on the Correspondent of petitioner society, closed the writ petition. Therefore, the issue cannot be permitted to be re-agitated. Insofar as the merits of the case are concerned, a careful perusal of the notice would show that impugned order was preceded by the notice in Form-I to both the assignees as well as the petitioner and the impugned order was however addressed to Sri S.Moulali, S/o Leela appaji. Two notices are issued to two persons and the petitioner who is found to be in possession of the assigned land in contravention of the provisions of the Act. Therefore, when a disputed question of fact arises whether the land is assigned land or patta land, a writ petition would not lie. An effective remedy of appeal to second respondent is available under Section 4-A of the Act and thereafter an appeal lies to Joint Collector under Section 4-B of the Act. Merely because an allegation is raised by the person in possession of the land that it is not assigned land, the jurisdiction of statutory authorities is neither taken away nor curtailed. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the matter. Counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is running Engineering College under a new Management and if the petitioner is dispossed, there will be serious hardship to petitioner. Therefore, it is appropriate to order status quo for a period of four weeks to enable the petitioner to prefer an appeal before second respondent immediately and obtain appropriate interim orders, if necessary. As and when appeal is filed, second respondent shall dispose of the same within a period of six weeks thereafter after furnishing copies of necessary documents as may be required by petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 12.03.2010 Pln