HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4413 of 2007 Date : 17.08.2011 Between : Malladi Prabavathamma. …..Petitioner And Agent to Government (District Collector), Khammam & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4413 of 2007 ORDER : This writ petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under : “to issue such appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent more so particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the order of the 1st respondent, dated 27/01/07 passed in I.A.No.3/07 in C.M.A. No:2/07 as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction after declaring the G.O.Ms.No.274, General Administration (Special.A) Department, dated 15/06/02 as null and void being contrary to the provisions of A.P.Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959”. The Agency Divisional Officer, Bhadrachalam, in exercise of powers under A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959, has passed an order dated 21st of November 2006 in LTR.Case No.2/BCM/05 for eviction of petitioner from the scheduled land covered by Sy.No.91/A admeasuring 0.72 ½ cents, Sy.No.91/C1 admeasuring Ac.4.62 ½ cents and Sy.No.92/3 admeasuring Ac.23.71 cents, situated at Laxmidevipeta village of Bhadrachalam Mandal in Khammam District. A finding is recorded in the said order that the petitioner is in possession of the aforesaid land in contravention of the Regulations, and hence, ordered to take possession of the land and assign the same to the eligible Tribals. As against the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the District Collector, who is Agent to Government, Khammam. The appellate authority has passed the impugned order in I.A.No.3 of 2007, transferring the appeal along with the interlocutory application, to the Additional Agent to Government/Project Officer, ITDA, Bhadrachalam, for disposal of the same. The order, dated 27th January 2007, transferring the appeal filed by the petitioner to the 5th respondent Additional Agent to Government/Project Officer, is questioned on the ground that he is not competent to dispose of the appeal, as much as the appeal is provided only to the Agent, who is the District Collector. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that in any event, this appeal cannot be transferred to the 5th respondent as much as the order of the Agency Divisional Officer, Bhadrachalam itself is passed referring to the observations made by the Additional Agent to Government/Project Officer of ITDA, to the effect that the internal roads are formed in the land in question for the purpose of real estate business. On the other hand, it is the case of respondents that the Additional Agent is also an Agent to Government and he is competent to dispose of the appeals, in view of the orders issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.274, dated 15.06.2002. It is submitted that even if the appeal is decided by the Additional Agent, the petitioner is in no way affected, and as such, he cannot have any grievance. In a batch of cases, this Court had already considered the issue and held that even the Additional Agent can dispose of the matters as an appellate authority in exercise of powers under the A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959, as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970. But, in this case, it is to be noticed that the order passed by the Agency Divisional Officer, refers to certain observations made by the 5th respondent- Additional Agent to Government/Project Officer, ITDA, Bhadrachalam. In view of the same, I find force in the contention advanced by the learned counsel for petitioner that when the order of primary authority is based on the observations made by the Project Officer of ITDA, the same authority cannot be relegated with the power to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Even a perusal of the order clearly indicates that certain observations made by the 5th respondent are referred to in the order of eviction passed by the Agency Divisional Officer, Bhadrachalam. As much as the appeal is filed before the Agent to Government, who is competent authority as per the Regulation, in view of the apprehension of the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is appropriate to set aside the order of the 1st respondent, transferring the petitioner’s appeal to the Additional Agent to Government, with a direction to the 1st respondent/Agent to Government, who is the District Collector, to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner on merits, as expeditiously as possible. Accordingly, the order, dated 27th January 2007, passed in I.A.No.3 of 2007 in CMA.No.2 of 2007, by the 1st respondent/Agent to Government, Khammam, is hereby quashed, with a direction to him to consider the appeal preferred by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on its own merits as expeditiously as possible. It is needless to observe that the interim order, dated 05.03.2007, granted by this Court, shall remain in force till appropriate final orders are passed by the 1st respondent. The writ petition is allowed with the directions referred above. No costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 17th August 2011 ajr