THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28752 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed questioning the proceedings of the second respondent dated 07.09.2011 as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioners seek a consequential direction to respondent Nos.1 to 3 not to interfere with their possession and enjoyment of the premises bearing H.No.11-6-397, 11th Ward, Gummalla Dibba, Kovuru Mandal, Nellore District. The petitioners, two in number, claim to have purchased the property by way of an agreement of sale in the year 1994. They claim to have constructed a house, and to be residing thereat ever since. The second respondent passed the impugned order dated 07.09.2011 holding that the house site granted in favour of late Nellore Ramanaiah should be resumed to the Government as the said Ramanaiah had died in January, 2011; the petitioners were non-residents of Gummalla Dibba Village; they were residing at Tiriveedhipadu Village of Dagadarthi Mandal; and the house site should be re-assigned to the legal heirs of late Nellore Ramanaiah as per their eligibility. When the matter was listed on 27.10.2011, Learned Government Pleader for Revenue sought time to obtain instructions. Again on 29.10.2011, the Learned Government Pleader sought time to ascertain whether the petitioners continue to remain in possession of the land as on date. Today the Learned Government Pleader would submit that the petitioners are in possession of the property in question. On being asked what was the law under which the proceedings dated 07.09.2011 was passed by the Joint Collector, Learned Government Pleader would state that the said proceedings are not referable to any statutory provision, but is more in the nature of an administrative order. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that proceedings have been initiated under the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, (for short, “the Act”) against the petitioners; a notice under Section 7 of the Act has already been issued; and the petitioners have submitted their objections thereto. The petitioners grievance is that the Tahsildar, who issued the notice under Section 7 of the Act, would be bound by the findings of the Joint Collector in the impugned proceedings dated 07.09.2011, and the very purpose of giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard under the Act would be rendered an empty ritual and a useless formality. I find considerable force in the said submission. Since the impugned proceedings dated 07.09.2011 are not referable to any statutory provision, ends of justice would be met if the third respondent is directed to consider the petitioners objections, filed in reply to the notice issued under Section 7 of the Act, on its own merits uninfluenced by any observations made in the order of the Joint Collector dated 07.09.2011; pass an order; and, if need be, take action thereafter in accordance with law. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J November 01, 2011 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28752 OF 2011 November 01, 2011 MD