THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19095 of 2011 ORDER: In view of pendency of statutory appeal filed by the petitioner under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Land Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’), this Writ Petition is being disposed of at the admission stage having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. The petitioner claims that he is the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.2.38 cents in Survey No.215/2 situated at Surampalem Village, Gandepalli Mandal, East Godavari District. It is stated that he purchased the aforesaid piece of land from its earlier owner by registered sale deed, dated 13.08.2008 vide document No.1606 of 2008. On the ground that the transfer of aforesaid land in favour of the petitioner is in contravention of the provisions of the Act, the fourth respondent – Tahsildar, Gandepalli Mandal, East Godavari District, passed order, dated 25.05.2011 in Reference No.B/41/2011 for eviction of the petitioner and to restore the land to the original assignee. As against the same, the petitioner has preferred statutory appeal along with an application for interim orders, before the third respondent - Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddapuram, East Godavari District, on 07.06.2011. In this Writ Petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the appellate authority is not considering the application for grant of interim relief and on the other hand, the primary authority is taking steps to execute the order of eviction passed by him. Under the scheme of the Act, against the order of eviction passed by the primary authority, there is a statutory appeal provided before the Revenue Divisional Officer. Although it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was no violation of any of the conditions of grant, in view of pendency of appeal before the third respondent, it is not desirable to record any finding on such claim of the petitioner. It is for the appellate authority to consider the grounds of appeal while disposing of the appeal. At the same time, when the appeal is filed along with the interlocutory application on 07.06.2011, there appears no reason at all for not considering the application for grant of interim relief. As much as it is stated that the petitioner has purchased the land in question by a registered sale deed and is in possession of the same since the date of purchase, and in view of pendency of appeal before the appellate authority, I deem it appropriate to direct the third respondent to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. There shall be a further direction that the order of eviction passed by the fourth respondent on 25.05.2011 in Ref.No.B/41/2011, shall remain suspended till the appeal filed by the petitioner is disposed of by the third respondent. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 11th JULY, 2011. kvni