IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19394 of 2008 Between: Laxman Rao S/o Bheem Rao Dammaragidda(V) Kangti(M) Medak District ..... PETITIONER AND The Tahsildar Kangti (M) Medak District .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.TULASI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s application dated 22-02-2008 for putting him in possession in accordance with proviso to Section 38-E (2) of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (for short “the Act”). In his aﬃdavit, the petitioner averred that he was granted protected tenancy certiﬁcate under Section 38-E of the Act. The litigation with regard to the said certiﬁcate ended with the dismissal of W.P.No.12941 of 1984 on 01-07- 1988 by this Court ﬁled by the rival claimants. When the petitioner’s request for handing over of possession to him was rejected by memo dated 22-11-1991 on the ground that this Court has not granted any such direction while dismissing W.P. No.12941 of 1984, the petitioner ﬁled W.P.No.28838 of 1995 in this Court. The said writ petition came to be disposed of by this Court by order dated 10-12- 2007, wherein the learned Judge while holding that in the absence of a speciﬁc direction given by this Court in W.P.No.12941 of 1984, memo dated 22-11-1991 did not call for any interference, however gave liberty to the petitioner to work out the appropriate remedy available to him in law for redressal of his grievance. The petitioner averred that subsequent to the dismissal of the said writ petition, he ﬁled a petition on 22-02-2008 before the respondent to put him in possession of the land in question. The grievance of the petitioner is that so far no action is taken by the respondent. Under proviso to Section 38-E (2) of the Act, where the land, the ownership of which has been transferred to the protected tenant under sub-section (1), is in the occupation of a person other than the protected tenant or holder of the certiﬁcate issued under sub-section (2) of Section 38-E, it shall be lawful for the Tahsildar to restore the possession of the said land to the protected tenant or holder of the certiﬁcate, after giving notice of eviction to the occupant thereof, in the prescribed manner. The above reproduced provision thus casts a duty on the respondent to entertain the application, if any, ﬁled by the protected tenant for restoration of possession of the land, if the same is in the occupation of a third party, examine it and dispose of the same in accordance with the said provision. If he is satisﬁed that the applicant holds a protected tenancy certiﬁcate and the land is in possession of a third party, it is incumbent upon him to recover possession from such third party and restore the same to the protected tenant. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent to consider and dispose of application dated 22-02-2008, said to have been ﬁled by the petitioner, in accordance with proviso to Section 38-E (2) of the Act, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.25297 of 2008 ﬁled by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 6th September, 2008 vrn