IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 16649 of 2001 BETWEEN: 1 Uda Venkata Mutyala Rao, S/o. Ramanna, R/o. Jannavarigude, Buttayagudem Mandal, W.G. District. 2 Uda Raja Rao, S/o. Ramanna, R/o. Jannavarigude, Buttayagudem Mandal, W.G.District. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 Special Deputy Tahsilder, Tribal Welfare No.1, Kota Ramachandrapuram, W.G. District. 2 Agent to the Government, W.G. District at Eluru. 3 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners land by set aside the Impugned order of G.O.Ms.No.111, dt:12.12.2000 passed by the 3rd respondent, even though the petitioners have been possession and enjoyment of the land since prior to commencement of the Act as illegal, null and void; and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.U.SIVANNARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following: ORDER: Against the ejectment orders passed by the Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Kota Ramachandrapuram, West Godavari District in S.R.108 of 1979 dated 21.08.1979 ejecting the petitioners applying the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation Act, 1959 from the land admeasuring Ac.0.77 ½ cents out of Ac.1.55 cents in R.S.No.93 situated at Mulagalampalli Village, Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District, the petitioners filed an appeal in S.R.A.No.1 of 1994 on the ﬁle of the Agent to the Government, who by order dated 11.12.1995 dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the said orders this writ petition has been filed. 2. Admittedly, the petitioners purchased the said land in question vide registered sale deed bearing document No.260/74 dated 08.04.1974. There cannot be any transfer of land in the scheduled areas even from non-tribal to non-tribal with eﬀect from 03.02.1970. In view of the prohibition laid down in Regulation I of 1959 as amended by Regulation I of 1970 the so-called agreement of sale is null and void as it was registered after the regulation I of 1970 came into force and the petitioners could not establish the transfer of property and handing over the possession. There cannot be any transfer of immovable property in the scheduled areas after Regulation I of 1979 came into force and admittedly the registration of the sale deed is after the prohibited dated 03.02.1970. Therefore, I am of the opinion that all the three authorities have rightly held that the transfer of property is hit by Regulation I of 1959 as amended by Regulation I of 1970. Thus, I do not see any merits in the writ petition to interfere with the concurrent ﬁndings recorded by all the three authorities. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J August 7, 2008 DSK