THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.25436 of 2010 DT.25.11.2010 Between: Thammineni Chinna Chenchaiah … Petitioner And The Tahsildar, Vinjamur Mandal, S.P.S.R.Nellore District & others. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: None appeared Counsel for respondents: AGP for Revenue (Assignment) The Court made the following ORDER: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in seeking to interfere with the petitioner’s possession of Acs.1.90 cents and Acs.3.00 cents in Survey Nos.272/4 and 198 respectively of Ravipadu Village, Vinjamur Mandal, S.P.S.R.Nellore District, without following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein it is inter alia stated that an extent of Acs.1.90 cents of land in Survey No.272/4 was assigned in favour of the petitioner in the year 1992, that pattadar pass books and title deeds were also issued in his favour and that the enquiry by revenue officials reveals that the petitioner has alienated the said extent to one Danthulur Venkateswarlu of Ravipadu, who is a wealthy pattadar. It is further stated that the petitioner has also alienated an extent of Acs.8.90 cents and Acs.3.26 cents comprised in Survey Nos.272-2 and 272-5, which was assigned in favour of other villagers. It is also averred in the counter affidavit that as on the date of inspection of the revenue officials, the purchaser has taken reclamation work over the entire extent of Acs.12.16 cents and he was asked by the revenue officials not to take up the jungle clearance work and stop all further activities. In para-8 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner has violated the provisions of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’) by alienating the assigned land, besides unauthorisedly selling the land which was not assigned to him. But curiously, while stating that no action has been initiated for resumption of land, the counter affidavit is silent as to whether any such action is in contemplation in future. However, at the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignment) while admitting that non- mentioning of such a fact is a lapse on the part of the respondents, has stated that the respondents will initiate proceedings under the provisions of the Act for resumption of the land. Inasmuch as no proceedings have been initiated so far for resumption, the petitioner cannot be evicted without initiation of such proceedings. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land assigned to him, without initiating proceedings under the Act. In the light of the submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignment), the respondents are left free to initiate such resumption proceedings. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, the interim order granted by this Court on 07.10.2010 is vacated and W.P.M.P.No.32483 of 2010 and W.V.M.P.No.5293 of 2010 are disposed of as infructuous. (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) Date: 25.11.2010. VGB