THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.9797 of 2010 Dated:27.04.2010 Between: Kola Venkateswara Rao. ….Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.9797 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners, except petitioner No.3, are residents of Lawyerpet Extension, Ongole, Prakasam District. Petitioner No.3 is resident of Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. They allege that they own lands in Vakadaripeta and Buchayyapeta Villages of Tondangi Mandal in East Godavari District. Petitioner No.1 is allegedly owner of 11.37 cents, petitioner No.2 is allegedly owner of Acs.4.85 cents, petitioner No.3 is allegedly owner of 16.76 cents, petitioner No.4 is allegedly owner of Acs.14.02 cents and petitioner No.5 is allegedly owner of Acs.5.74 cents. It is their case that respondent Nos.3 and 4 appear to have come to their land and took measurements. On enquiries respondent No.3 gave a copy of proceedings dated 16.06.2008 to petitioner No.1. As per the said proceedings, respondent No.6 sought alienation of Acs.2646.52 cents in favour of respondent No.5 and requested for advance possession. Respondent No.2 agreed for the proposal to handover Acs.2018.21 cents on payment of exgratia. Respondent No.2 also accorded permission to give possession pending finalization of the alienation proposals. The petitioners contend that they approached the Sub Registrar, Tuni, for information regarding the ownership of the lands. According to them an extent of Acs.39.00 is patta land of the petitioners’ vendors. The petitioners, therefore, contend that any attempt to dispossess them without due process of law would be illegal and unconstitutional. They also allege that they have not violated or contravened the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. Therefore, they filed the instant writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to dispossess as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners’ Counsel and Assistant Government Pleader made their submissions. After hearing both of them and perusing the affidavit accompanying the writ petition as well as the material papers, this Court is convinced that the petitioners have any valid cause of action. Petitioners have not filed the documents of title in support of their case that they purchased the lands from various persons, except making an allegation that the land purchased by them is not assigned land. Merely because proposals for alienation of land to respondent No.5 are pending and respondent No.2 directed to deliver advance possession, the petitioners cannot get any cause of action to approach this Court. However, this Court observes that if the petitioners purchased the land which is not assigned land and are in physical possession of the land, they may not be disturbed without due process of law. The Writ Petition with the above observations is accordingly dismissed. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 27.04.2010 vs