IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 24712 of 2008 Between: K. Abhisek, S/o. Prabhakar, R/o. Dudeeda Village, Kondapak Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by District Collector, at Sanga Reddy, Medak District. 2 Tahasildar, Kondapak Mandal, At Kondapak, Medak District. ....RESPONDENTS 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 issue appropriate Writ, order or directions; particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in trying to evict the petitioner from the subject land admeasuring Ac. 0-20 Gts of Land in Sy.No. 668/2 and Ac. 0-35 Gts., of Land in Sy.No. 668/4 totally admeasuring Ac. 1-15 Gts., of Duddeda Village, Kondapak Mandal, Medak District, in spite of grant of assignment and even without there being any violation as being illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and also promissory estoppels, and in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to drop all further proceedings forthwith by setting aside the impugned notice dt. 04-10-2008 in ﬁle No. B/6601/08 in the interest of justice and fair play. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.VENKAT RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims that he was assigned an extent of Ac.0.20 guntas of land in Sy.No.668/2 and Ac.0.35 guntas of land in Sy.No.668/4 totally admeasuring Ac.1.15 guntas by the 2nd respondent – Tahsidlar, Kondapak Mandal on 29.7.2003 and since then he is in possession and enjoyment of the said land. Pattadar pass books and title deeds were also issued in his favour and his name was mutated in the revenue records in respect of the said lands. While the matters stood thus, the 2nd respondent has issued the impugned notice dated 4.10.2008 under Rule 3 of the A.P. (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 2007 (for short ‘the Rules’) seeking his explanation as to why he should not be dispossessed from the lands in question on the ground that the lands purchased by him are government lands. Pursuant to the said notice, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 23.10.2008 stating that he is not the purchaser of the assigned land and that he is the original assignee of the lands in question. The grievance of the petitioner is that without considering the said explanation, the respondents are now trying to evict him from the said lands and hence, he ﬁled the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and at their request the writ petition is taken up for ﬁnal disposal at the admission stage itself. On instructions, the learned Government Pleader submits that so far no action has been taken by the respondents pursuant to the impugned notice and that no ﬁnal orders are passed after considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner. In the circumstances, the respondents are directed not to evict the petitioner from the subject matter of lands until and unless ﬁnal orders are passed after considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the impugned notice. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. N.V.RAMANA.J DT.13.11.2008 msv/ks