IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 8934 of 2008 Between: Karnam Musalaiah, S/o. Sanyasayya, R/o. Venkatanagaram Village, Addateegala Mandal, E.G.District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Agent to the Government, Rampachodavaram,East Godavari District. 2 The Special Deputy Collector(T.W), Rampachodavaram,East Godavari District. 3 The Tahsildar, Addateegala Mandal, E.G.District. 4 The Spl. Dy. tahsildar, (Tribunal Welfare), Addateegala Mandal, E.G.District. 5 Goduthuri Babu Rao, S/o. Not known to the petitioner, R/o. Addapalli Village, Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{LS} ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare, appearing for R-1 to R-4, and the learned counsel for the un-official respondent-caveator-R-5. With their consent, this writ petition itself is taken up for disposal at this stage. 2. The Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District, through his orders dated 10-03-2008 in L.T.R.P.No.32 of 2007, had concluded the enquiry, and ordered for ejection of the writ petitioner herein from out of the lands held by him in schedule area as he is a non-tribal. It was found that the transfer of land in his favour to be contrary to sub section (2) of Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Schedule Areas Land Transfer Regulation Act 1 of 1959, as amended by Regulations 1 of 1970 (for short ‘the Act, 1959). 3. It is not in dispute that against the impugned order, appeal would lie to the Additional Agent to the Government and the Project Officer, I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram, in terms of sub Section (3) of Section 2 of the Act, 1959. The writ petitioner has accordingly preferred an appeal on 22-03-2008 before the Additional Agent to the Government and the Project Officer, I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram. The said appeal is yet to be taken up for consideration. Understandably, the Additional Agent to the Government and Project Officer, I.T.D.A. is more pre- occupied with several other important public duties and functions, which are essentially intended to secure implementation of various welfare schemes in the project area. But nonetheless he is also required to take up the appeals provided to him against the orders of the primary authorities. He is constituted as appellate authority like the Civil Court. But, he may not hold Court every day. However, at the same time, the Additional Agent to the Government-cum-Project Officer, I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram, has got a necessary calendar, by which, he would be in a position to take up the appeals preferred to him on specified days. 4. It is equally important that the rights of the parties, which are agitated before him by preferring appeals, have to be considered appropriately. An appellate authority is entitled to reconsider the entire fact situation and is also entitled to come to an independent conclusion on the very facts, which are gathered by the primary authority. Therefore, these important functions can be discharged only if the appeals are heard systematically and regularly. 5. Since the un-official respondent is already represented by the learned counsel in this writ petition, the un-official respondent accepts notice of the appeal preferred before the Additional Agent to the Government-cum-Project Officer, I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram. Since the memorandum of grounds of appeal, preferred to the State appellate authority, is also form part of this record in appeal, now they will not need further notice being served by the Additional Agent to the Government and the Project Officer, I.T.D.A. 6. In these set of circumstances, the 1st respondent- Additional Agent to the Government and the Project Officer, I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram, is directed to take up the appeal, preferred by the petitioner, for further enquiry, and dispose of the same, at the earliest, at any rate, before 30-06-2008. In the mean time, status quo as of now shall be maintained with regard to the possession of the land. All the parties are directed not to make any improvements or create encumbrances on the property in question in the meantime. 7. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________________________ JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO NOTE: Issue C.C. in three days. B/o. KVR