THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT W.P. No.20817 of 2007 ORDER: Heard Mr.A.S.C.Bose for petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents. The petitioner prays for a direction to respondent No.3 to consider the request/representation of petitioner dated 18.06.2007 where under the petitioner seeks consideration of his case vis-à-vis of land in an extent of Ac.3-00 in Sy.No.142 of Edulapuram Village, Khammam Taluk, Khammam District under Section 3(5) of the A.P.Assigned Lands (Prohibition of transfers Act)1977 i.e., (act 9 of 1977). The learned counsel for petitioner relies on K.Dattaiah and others and Tahsildar Hayathnagar Taluk, Hyd. And another1 for the proposition that a statutory right is created in a small transferee farmer, to continue to retain the assigned land, not withstanding the purchase by a person is otherwise objectionable under Section 3 and 4 of the Act. In the above decision, he relies on the following paragraphs 4 and 5. “So if the requirements of sub-section 5 are satisfied, the operation of Sec.3 which is a pivotal provision and virtually the entire Act itself has no application, i.e. the prohibition of transfer of assignment of lands contained in Sec.3 is excluded if the conditions of 11982 (2) APLJ, 332 2 sub-section 5 are satisfied. In order to attract the provisions of sub-section 5 of Sec.3 the following conditions must be satisfied: (1) The purchaser must be landless poor. (2) He purchased the land in good faith and for valuable consideration. (3) The said purchase is either from original assignee or from the transferee (4) The land so purchased is in his possession for cultivation or as house site on the dte of the commencement of the Act. As the sub-section excludes the jurisdiction of the authority to apply the provisions of the Act it is incumbent on the authorities to record the finding necessary as contemplated under sub-section 5 to order resumption and evict the purchasers in possession of the property. Admittedly the show cause notice and the impugned order do not fulfil these requirements of law and the proceedings are liable to be interficted. 5. The impugned order dated 20.01.1981 is quashed and the respondents are directed to follow the procedure laid down in the Act after giving the prescribed notice in Form No.1 under Rule 3 of the Rules framed under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules 1977 before resuming the lands and evicting the petitioners from the disputed lands.” The prayer is for consideration of representation in accordance with statutory scheme of Act 9 of 1997. In view of the decision referred to above and to meet the ends of justice, I am satisfied the writ petition can be disposed of by this order: “The petitioner or any person claiming through petitioner is given liberty to represent the 3rd respondent by enclosing a copy of the representation dated 18.06.2007, additional representation along with the copy of this order to 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent is directed to consider the representation in accordance with law, if not already a decision is taken on the representation dated 18.06.2007 and pass orders.” 3 Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. ________________ S. V. BHATT, J Dt: 12.03.2018 dv