THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 785 of 2005 Dated: 2.12.2010 Between: 1. Padala Nageswara Rao and others .... PETITIONERS AND 1 Mandal Revenue Officer, Gokavaram Mandal, E.G.District and others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 785 of 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of respondents 1 and 2 in attempting to forcibly dispossess the petitioners from their respective lands in Sy.No.936 of Kamrajupeta H/o Kothapalli, Gokavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, without issuing any notice and without affording an opportunity of being heard as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the respondents not to dispossess them from their respective lands. It appears that the petitioners have purchased small extents of land in survey No.936 of Kamrajupeta H/o Kothapalli, Gokavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, under various registered documents. In fact, their names are entered in the revenue records as purchasers and possessors and even pattadar passbooks were issued. While that being so, respondents 1 and 2 forcibly intended to dispossess the petitioners. On enquiries, it was revealed that the vendors of the petitioners viz., Janapareddy Kamaraju S/o Pedda Raja Rao was declarant under the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1974 and the lands purchased by the petitioners were held to be surplus lands and as such, the respondents are taking action to dispossess the petitioners and to take over the land under the Act. According to the petitioners, the said Janapareddy Kamaraju represented them that the lands purchased by petitioners are not surplus lands under the Act and he has no surplus lands and the lands sold were within the holding of petitioners. Under that impression, petitioners have purchased the same under registered sale deeds and thus, pattadar passbooks were also issued by revenue authorities. The petitioners were not at all parties to the proceedings either before the primary authority or before the appellate authority or before any other authority where the agricultural lands ceiling proceedings have taken place. While that being so, they are asked to vacate the lands otherwise they would be forcibly dispossessed. The learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents stated that this is the land declared as surplus from the holding of the 3rd respondent-Janapareddy Kamaraju and therefore, there is no othergo except to take over their land as surrendered by the owner. Be that as it may. The fact that the petitioners have purchased the land in question under the sale deeds and they have been in possession of the same since very long time and pattadar passbooks were also issued in their favour, is not in dispute. Once the petitioners are in possession of the land in question and even the revenue records reflect their names, the respondent-authorities would not have made effort to dispossess them from their lands, without following due process of law. The petitioners were neither party to the surrender proceedings nor any other proceedings under the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1974. Under those circumstances, I am of the opinion that the respondents would not have made any effort to dispossess the petitioners, without following due process of law. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioners, without any notice as required under law. Further, if necessary, the respondents may consider to assigning this land in favour of the petitioners, if they are found to be landless poor persons and eligible as per law, as on the date of purchase. No order as to costs. ___________________ Justice C.V. Ramulu Dated:2.12.2010 Nn THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 785 of 2005 Dated: 2.12.2010