THE HONOUABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P. No. 1174 of 2008 Date:08-02-2008 Between: Lachman Das Gogia .. PETITIONER AND The District Collector, Ranga Reddy and two others .. RESPONDENTS ORDER: The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in demolishing the farm house, water tank etc. in his agricultural land in an extent of Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.No.510/22 of Kanakamamidi village, Moinabad mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased agricultural land in an extent of Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.No.510/22 of Kanakamamidi village, Moinabad mandal, Ranga Reddy District from M/s. Padala Rami Reddy Educational Society vide registered document No.1793/95, dated 28.07.1995. The said Society purchased the same from Ms.Khatija Mehdi Khan and Smt.Farzana Aziz Khan on 16.07.1993 who in turn purchased the said land from M.Kalavathi and others who are the legal heirs of the pattadar viz. Malkapuram Venkataiah. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the said land was assigned in favour of Malkapuram Venkataiah son of Shivaiah who belongs to scheduled caste community. It is stated that the as the said land was assigned in favour of the land less poor and the petitioner was found in possession of the said land having purchased the same, a show cause notice in Form No.I in Lr.No.B/419/2005, dated 02.03.2005 to the purchaser has been issued and served through panchayat secretary, but no explanation has been submitted and accordingly, the said land in question along with other lands were resumed by proceedings No.B/419/05, dated 11.11.2005. The learned Government Pleader further submits that the possession of the said land was also taken over by conducting panchanama on 09.01.2006 in the presence of the witnesses and handed over to the custody of the Panchayat Secretary. It is the case of the petitioner that the show cause notice has not been served on him and only when the copy of the resumption orders have been furnished by the Government Pleader, the petitioner came to know about passing of resumption orders and accordingly he filed an appeal under Section 4-A of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 on 30.01.2008. Whether the show cause notice has been served on the petitioner or not and whether the final orders have been also served or not, I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the same. However, if the show cause notice is not served and the petitioner is not aware about passing of final orders, it is for the petitioner to question the said order by way of filing an appeal explaining the reasons for not filing the appeal within the time and if the appellate authority comes to the conclusion that the appeal is maintainable, it is for the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the same. Having regard to the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of the appeal said to have been filed by the petitioner on 30.01.2008 against the resumption orders, dated 11.11.2005 passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Moinabad, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till the said appeal is disposed of deciding all the questions including the maintainability and validity of the appeal, status-quo obtaining as on today with regard to the possession shall be maintained. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:08.02.2008 Ccm