IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 29159 of 2008 Between: V. Satyam, s/o. Narayana Appadu, r/o. 9-19-4/11, C. B-M Compound, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam District. 3 The Mandla Revenue Officer, Madhurawada Mandal, Visakhapatnam 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 to issue a writ or order or orders or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent thereatening to dispossess the petitioner's suit schedule land without following the petitioner's suit schedule land with out following the due process of law which is illegal, arbitrary unconstitution and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner's suit schedule land of one Acre situated in Survey No. 127/7, in Madhurawada Village and Mandal of Visakhapatnam District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KARRI SURYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.29159 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner purchased an extent of Ac.2-89 cents of land in Survey No.127/7 of Madhurawada Revenue Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District from one Mr. Kolli Acchibabu, son of Appalaswamy. It is stated that on coming to know that the land was assigned, he approached the Mandal Revenue Officer-third respondent, who in turn addressed a letter dated 04-12-2004 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam-second respondent recommending regularization of the land on payment of market value. The grievance of the petitioner is that no action has been taken on the said letter so far and steps are now being taken to evict him forcibly. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. Not only the record discloses but also the petitioner had admitted that the land purchased by him was assigned to one Mr.Acchibabu. Obviously, the sale in favour of the petitioner is hit by the provisions of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 (Act 9 of 1977). However, even where an assigned land is purchased, the transferee can be proceeded against only by issuing a show cause notice. A final order has to be passed after considering the explanation submitted by the assignee. Right of appeal is also provided. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that respondents 2 and 3 shall proceed against the petitioner only by issuing a notice under the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 19-01-2009 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}