IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL NO : 516 of 1998 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 10/03/1998 in WP No. 6195 of 1995 on the file of the High Court.) Between: R. Subrahmanyam, S/o. Giriyappa, Jellipalli Village, Kudair Mandal, Anantapur Dist. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kudair Mandal, Ananthapur Dist. 2 The Jt. Collector, Ananthapur District, 3 The Commissioner of Land Revenue, Govt. of A.P., Nampally, Hyderabad. 4 Mangala Venkatesulu, S/o. Ramanjaneyulu, Jellipalli Village, Kudair Mandal, Ananthapur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant: MR.P.VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.A.NO. 516 OF 1998 ORDER: (Per Smt. T. Meena Kumari, J) This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 10.3.1998 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in WP No. 6195 of 1998. The writ petition was filed by the appellant/writ petitioner challenging the proceedings dated 16.6.1997 passed by the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector and also another proceedings dated 15.1.1998 passed by the 3rd respondent-Commissioner of Land Revenue. By these proceedings the transfer of assigned land in favour of the writ petitioner was set aside and the land was ordered to be restored to the legal heirs of original assignee. The writ petitioner is the purchaser of the assigned land to an extent of Ac.5.08 in Sy.No. 327-1 of Udiripikonda village, Kudair Mandal, Ananthapur District from the assignee. The said transfer of land was set aside and the land was ordered to be restored to the legal heirs of original assignee by the proceedings of the respondents 2 and 3 which were impugned in the writ petition. The learned single Judge observed that there cannot be any dispute that the assigned land was transferred in favour of the writ petitioner in violation of the conditions incorporated in the ‘D’ form patta. He further observed that the Commissioner pointed out in his order that even at the time of purchase of the assigned land, the father of the writ petitioner was having 25 acres of patta land and the petitioner himself was 8 or 9 years old and he had no independent avocation at that time. The correctness of the statement made by the Commissioner on the basis of the report of the Collector, Ananthapur was not assailed. We have gone through the record and found that the sale of assigned land was in violation of the conditions stipulated in the ‘D’ form patta. Therefore, we are of the view that the order of the learned single Judge does not suffer from any infirmity. No interference is called for and the writ appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Dt.10.6.2008 KR ........REGISTRAR To 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kudair Mandal, Ananthapur Dist. 2 The Jt. Collector, Ananthapur District, 3 The Commissioner of Land Revenue, Govt. of A.P., Nampally, Hyderabad. 4. 2 CD copies