IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 16537 of 2001 Between: Kommineni Radhamma, W/o Venkaiah, R/o Enkoor Village & Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Mandal Revenue Officer, Enkoor Mandal, Khammam District. 2 A.P. Bhoodan Yagna Board, Rep. by its Secretary Gandhi Bhavan, M.J.Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of dry land of the petitioner in an extent of acres 2.30 guntas in Sy.No.21AA of Enkoor Village, Khammam District as illegal and void and consequently declare that the petitioners are entitled to cultivate the said land Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ASSIGNMENT WRIT PETITION NO : 16567 of 2001 Between: 1 Ummineni Nageswara Rao S/o Agaiah R/o Enkoor Village & Mandal, Khammam District. 2 Ummineni Rama Rao S/o Agaiah R/o Enkoor Village & Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Mandal Revenue Officer, Enkoor Mandal, Khammam District. 2 A.P. Bhoodan Yagna Board, Rep. by its Secretary, Gandhi Bhavan, M.J.Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamu's declaring the action of the Respondents interferings with the possession and enjoyment of the land of the petitioner in an extent of acres 2.05 guntas in Sy.No.21 of Enkoor Village, Khammam District as illegal and void and consequently declare that the petitioners are entitled to cultivate the said land Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent : GP FOR ASSIGNMENT The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: These two writ petitions raise a common question and can be disposed of by this common order. Sole petitioner in W.P.No.16537 of 2001 and petitioners 1 and 2 in W.P.No.16567 of 2001 are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the land in question. The land bearing Survey No.21AA admeasuring Acres 2.30 guntas and the land bearing Survey No.21 admeasuring Acres 2-05 guntas both situated in Enkoor Village, Khammam District, respectively, is the subject-matter of each of the writ petitions. The petitioners allege that from a common vendor Budde Mangamma, W/o.Budde Narayana, they purchased the aforesaid respective lands under respective agreements of sale way back in 1969 and 1973 respectively. They however claim that the agreements of sale were actually reduced into writing much later. They claim that they continued to be in possession throughout. Alleging that the respondents are interfering with their possession, the present writ petitions are filed and it is asserted that the petitioners never received any notice, claim or objection from any of the respondents. This Court, while admitting the writ petitions on 09.08.2001, had granted orders of status-quo existing as on that date to be continued. The said order was extended by a further order dated 19.07.2002 and was made absolute on 30.07.2004 in Writ Petition No.16567 of 2001. Similar order of status-quo was also passed in 16537 of 2001 and it continued to remain in force even now. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit together with annexures asserting that the land belongs to the second respondent Board and that they had allotted the same to the husband of Mangamma namely Budda Narayana. It is further claimed that the wife of the said allottee has unauthorisedly sold the land to the petitioners in either of the writ petitions and it is further claimed that the said aspect was brought to the notice of the Bhoodan Yagna Board. It is further alleged that the Bhoodan Yagna Board issued notice which was served on the petitioners and only 2nd petitioner in Writ Petition No.16567 of 2001, filed an explanation, which was rejected by the Bhoodan Yagna Board and asked the 1st respondent to restore the land. According to the 1st respondent, he had merely implemented the directions of the 2nd respondent. The second respondent has not filed any counter affidavit nor there is any representation on their behalf even on the earlier date of hearing and also on this day. The petitioners have filed a reply affidavit assailing the statement of counter-affidavit particularly to the extent of allegation that notice was issued to them and they did not reply. It is claimed by the petitioners that they continued to be in possession throughout for the last several decades and even after the interim order was passed, they have raised Sun-flower crop and they have been raising cotton and mirchi crop alternatively. They also refuted the allegations in counter affidavit that petitioners being non-tribals are not entitled for the allotment of land, by contending that as per the over-riding effect given to the A.P. Bhoodan and Gramdhan Act, 1965, the said objection is not tenable. After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader, it is apparent that the interim order of status-quo passed by this court has been in force for the last more than eight (8) years. It is also asserted that the petitioners continued to be in possession and no third party interest has intervened. The petitioners themselves claimed that they are from weaker sections and they themselves are land-less poor persons who are entitled for assignment under the object and spirit of the A.P. Bhoodan and Gramdhan Act itself. The basic assertion of the petitioners that they never received any notice from the second respondent, to my mind, assumes significance. In the light of the above circumstances and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate that the petitioners be granted one more opportunity to make a detailed representation to the second respondent and the second respondent shall consider the said representation in the light of the attending circumstances and pass appropriate reasoned orders thereupon. Till such time, the status-quo orders passed by this court on 09.08.2001 in either of the Writ Petitions shall continue to operate till the second respondent considers, passes and communicates a reasoned order to the petitioners. With the above directions, both the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. __________________________ VILAS V.AFZUL PUKAR, J Dated 27, January, 2009. TSR/KSH