THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28975 OF 2011 ORDER: The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to set aside the impugned memo dated 08.06.1999 issued by the third respondent. Sri S. Satyam Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioners, would submit that the petitioners are illiterate; due to lack of proper legal advise, they failed to question the said proceedings dated 08.06.1999 in W.P.No.19428 of 2002 filed by them earlier; on the ground that the petitioners had not choose to question the said order, this Court had refused to interfere with the order passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (A.P. Act 9 of 1977); and, since there is a long delay from the date on which the impugned order was passed, the Revenue Divisional Officer may be directed to consider the condone delay petition, to be filed along with the appeal, sympathetically as all the petitioners are illiterate. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignment), on instructions, would state that pursuant to the said order dated 08.06.1999, the respondents had already taken possession of the lands on 05.07.1999 itself, and had handed over possession to another vide proceedings dated 28.10.2011. The said proceedings, whereby the land assigned earlier was allotted to others, is on the very same day when the Writ Petition was filed i.e., on 28.10.2011. The petitioners had earlier invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by way of W.P.No.19428 of 2002. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by order dated 25.11.2010. The impugned order is dated 08.06.1999 and has not been subjected to challenge for the past 12 years. As this Court, by order in W.P.No.19428 of 2002 dated 25.11.2010, refused to interfere with the subsequent action of the Mandal Revenue Officer in resuming the land on 08.06.1999 on the ground that the order, impugned in this Writ Petition, was not challenged therein, this Court would not be justified in entertaining this Writ Petition whereby the impugned order dated 08.06.1999 is sought to be challenged after an inordinate delay exceeding twelve years. The fact, however, remains that this Court, by order in W.P.No.19428 of 2002 dated 25.11.2010, while dismissing the Writ Petition, had observed that the petitioners may approach the Revenue Divisional Officer and seek redressal under Section 4-A of A.P. Act 9 of 1977; place all facts; and, if the Revenue Divisional Officer came to a conclusion that no notice was issued to petitioner Nos.2 to 13, he may consider the appeal and pass appropriate orders. In case the petitioners prefer an appeal under Section 4-A of A.P. Act 9 of 1977, I have no reason to doubt that the Revenue Divisional Officer would consider the petition, seeking condonation of the delay in preferring the appeal, in accordance with the observations of this Court in W.P.No.19428 of 2002 dated 25.11.2010, and pass orders thereupon in accordance with law. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J October 31, 2011 Note: Issue C.C. in three days. B/O.MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28975 OF 2011 October 31, 2011 MD