THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7144 of 2003 ORDER: In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in trying to evict him from the land admeasuring Acs.11.10 guntas in Survey No.1116 situated at Raghavapur Village, Peddapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District, without giving any notice and without conducting any enquiry, as illegal and arbitrary. The facts, which are not in dispute, are as under: One E.Manohar Rao, who is the owner of various extents of agricultural lands, filed a declaration in C.C.No.P/3322, 3323, 3324/75 in respect of the lands including the land in Survey No.1116 under Section 8 of the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1974 (for short ‘the Land Ceiling Act’). The Land Reforms Tribunal passed an order on 14.05.1987 declaring that the declarant is a surplus land holder and in the surrender proceedings the said Manohar Rao surrendered the land covered by Survey No.1116 admeasuring Acs.11.10 guntas, which is in possession of the petitioner, who was declared as a protected tenant under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal in L.R.A.No.23 of 1987 and the Appellate Tribunal while recording the submission made by the learned Government Pleader that if the appellant-petitioner herein is the protected tenant and his tenancy is proved, instead of the declarant- E.Manohar Rao, the Government would step into shoes of the declarant and the protected tenancy of the appellant will not be disturbed, held that if the appellant is a protected tenant in respect of the surrendered land, he continues and remains to be a protected tenant and he suffers no loss, and accordingly dismissed the appeal by order dated 18.12.1989. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed C.R.P.No.15 of 1990 and the same was dismissed by this Court on 13.01.1995 observing that the tenancy of the so-called protected tenant has been safe-guarded, and as such the reasons now made out are imaginary and that if it is shown that the authorities have not committed any illegality or their order resulted in miscarriage of justice, then only this Court will interfere. After dismissal of the said revision petition, the present writ petition is filed stating that the petitioner has already included the land in dispute in the declaration filed by him in 1975 under the Land Ceiling Act and that it has been included to his holdings in the order passed by the Land Reforms Tribunal and therefore, the respondents cannot evict the petitioner from the land in question. It is further stated that if at all the respondents are thinking to evict him from the land in question to distribute the same to the landless poor persons, it is incumbent upon them to issue a notice calling upon the petitioner to prove the fact of his being a protected tenant. But without doing so, in the Grama Sabha conducted on 16.04.2003, the first respondent declared that the land will be distributed to the landless poor person and the same is arbitrary and illegal. Even though the writ petition is filed in the year 2003, till now the respondents have not filed any counter affidavit denying the declaration so made by the first respondent with regard to the distribution of the land in the Grama Sabha of Raghavapur Vilalge held on 16.04.2003. Heard Sri I.Aga Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the protected tenants are holding the land in ceiling limits and it was included in their holdings, such tenants cannot be dispossessed from the land, without following due procedure, as held by this Court in K.Laxmaiah v. Special Tahsildar, L.R.T.East, Hyderabad[1]. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is a protected tenant of the land in question and he was declared as such under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950. Even if the land in question is included in the declaration of E.Manohar Rao, who was declared as surplus land holder, and if the said land is surrendered by the said Manohar Rao, the petitioner will become the tenant of the Government and he will not be deprived of the land in his possession. In the circumstances, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners, without following due process of law. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J Date: 24.03.2011 va [1] 1978 (2) ALT 227