THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 8879 OF 2002 Dated: 22.11.2011 Between : Tella Ankaiah … Petitioner And State of Andhra Pradesh and 6 others … Respondents The Court made the following:- THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 8879 OF 2002 O R D E R: The petitioner herein was assigned Ac.1.20 cents of land situated in survey No.506/1B3 situated in Pernamitta village, Santhanuthalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District in two spells on 25.09.1983 and 19.05.1995. Accordingly, D.K. Patta No.22/1392 dated 25.04.1983 was granted for Ac.0.20 cents of land and D.K.Patta No.04/1404, dated 19.05.1995 was granted for Ac.1.00. However, by order dated 08.03.2002, passed by the 3rd respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer, the said pattas were cancelled on the ground that the petitioner failed to put the assigned land for cultivation. It was also mentioned in the said order that the assigned land was being used by Vaddera community people as burial ground and that the grant of alternative land to the petitioner will be considered after securing a suitable land fit for cultivation. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole contending that the land assigned to him was in fact under cultivation. The version of the petitioner was not accepted and the 2nd respondent by order dated 08.04.2002, dismissed the appeal. Hence the present writ petition challenging the said orders passed by the respondents 2 and 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. I have also heard the learned counsel for the respondents 4 to 7, who got themselves impleaded, stating that after resuming the land in question they were put in possession of the same. As could be seen from the material available on record, a finding of fact was recorded by the respondents 2 and 3 that Ac.1.20 cents of land assigned to the petitioner was not made fit for cultivation. I do not find any justifiable ground to interfere with such a concurrent finding of fact. Consequently the impugned order to the extent of cancellation of pattas and resumption as stipulated under condition No.7 of D.Form Patta cannot be held to be illegal. So far as the alternative land proposed to be granted to the petitioner is concerned, in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3, it is stated that the land admeasuring Ac.0.50 cents of land in survey No.794 of S.N.Padu village and Mandal, Prakasam District was already identified and steps are being taken for identifying the balance land of A.0.70 cents. The petitioner filed an additional affidavit dated 02.03.2011 stating that though alternative land to an extent of Ac.0.40 cents in survey No.794 of S.N.Padu village was provided, the balance has not been assigned till today. It is also stated that vast extent of land is available in survey Nos.240, 249 of Pernamitta village and the alternative land can be assigned out of the said land. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is hereby granted liberty to make a representation to the 3rd respondent for allotment of the land stated to have been available in Pernamitta village. If any such representation is made by the petitioner, the respondents 2 and 3 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of the petitioner’s representation. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 22.11.2011 Ivd