THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3780 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner prays that this Hon’ble 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 3rd respondent in insisting the petitioner to vacate from the land of Ac.1.08 cents in Survey Number 109 of Raghavapuram Village pursuant to notice in Ref:[B]/45/2007, Dt.02.05.2007 without conducting enquiry and without passing any final order thereon, as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, violative of the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, rules framed there under and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the said land.” Petitioner claims that she is the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.1.08 cents covered by Survey No.109 of Raghavapuram Village. The third respondent - Tahsildar, Korukonda Mandal, East Godavari District, has initiated proceedings under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’) alleging that the aforesaid land was assigned to one Syed Meera and the petitioner is in possession of it in contravention of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of filing the explanation, without passing any final order, the respondents are insisting her to vacate the land in question. Counter-affidavit is filed by the respondents. In the counter-affidavit, it is stated that after the show cause notice was issued, as the petitioner has not filed any explanation, final orders were passed on 30.06.2007 in Ref.(B)45/2007. It is also stated that the land resumed was given possession to third parties. During the course of hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Assignment appearing for the respondents has produced a copy of order, dated 30.06.2007 in Ref.(B)45/2007. The same is a final order passed for eviction of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has not filed explanation. Although it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the respondents, assignment was made in favour of the vendor of the petitioner and there was no condition of non- alienation at that point of time, as the petitioner has not questioned the final order, it is not possible to record the validity of order, dated 30.06.2007. As much as there is an appeal against order, dated 30.06.2007 and as it is stated that the said order is not served on the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to prefer appeal before the appellate authority against order, dated 30.06.2007, within a period of eight (8) weeks from today. If such appeal is preferred, the appellate authority shall consider the same on merits without raising any objection on the limitation and to pass appropriate orders. The respondents are directed to maintain status quo as on today with regard to possession of the land in question for a period of eight (8) weeks from today. Subject to the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 9th JUNE, 2011. kvni