IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17362 of 2007 Between: Y. Venkata Rao and another ... PETITIONERS a n d The Tahsildar, Chintalpudi, West Godavari district … RESPONDENT ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by Y. Venkata Rao and Y. Venkata Krishna Rao seeking mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in insisting them to vacate the lands in their occupation as arbitrary and illegal. 2. The petitioners claim that they are absolute owners, possessors and enjoyers of the lands bearing S.No.32-3B/14A admeasuring Ac.0-42 cents, S.No.32-4B/2A admeasuring Ac.0-42 cents, S.No.32-4B/4 admeasuring Ac.0-42 cents, S.No.32-3B/11A admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents,S.No.32-3B/13A admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents, S.No.32-3B/9A admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents, S.No.32-3B/3 admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents, S.No.32-4B/1A admeasuring Ac.0-43 cents, Sy.No.32-3B/6A admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents, S.No.32-3B/1 admeasuring Ac.0-45 cents, S.No.32-3B/5 admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents, S.No.32-3B/15 admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents, S.No.32-4B/5A admeasuring Ac.0-43 cents, S.No.32-3B/12 admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents and S.No.32-3B/8A admeasuring Ac.0-44 cents, having purchased the same under registered sale deed Nos.268/04, 255/04, 269/04, 252/04, 271/04, 225/04, 218/04, 219/04, 223/04, 222/04, 220/04, 221/04, 253/04, 2004/03 and 224/04 respectively. 3. The respondent issued notice to the petitioners alleging that their purchase is in contravention of the provisions of Sub-Section (2) of Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. The petitioners submitted explanation to the show cause notices. Apprehending disposition of lands pending consideration of their explanations, the petitioners approached this Court invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Assignment appearing for the respondent. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are bonafide purchasers and therefore, the sales are not hit by the provisions of Sub-Section (2) of Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. A further submission has been made that the petitioners submitted explanations to the show cause notices and their explanations are yet to be considered by the respondent. 6. The factual aspect of the petitioners submitting explanation to the show cause notices is not contradicted by the learned Government Pleader for Assignment. 7. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the explanations submitted by the petitioners to the show cause notices and pass appropriate orders. There shall be status quo existing as on this day till disposal of their explanations. ___________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J August 23, 2010. PN THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17362 of 2007 August 23, 2010