THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.152 of 2008 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioners seek a mandamus by way of directions to the third respondent not to dispossess them from the land admeasuring Acs.4.75 cents covered by Survey No.183/1 and 183/2 situated at Namavaram Village, Rajanagaram Mandal, East Godavari District. The petitioners claim purchase of the aforesaid land by registered sale deeds, dated 27.04.2005, vide document Nos.2796/2005 and 2789/2005 from Smt. Sappa Dhanalaxmi and Smt. Sappa Jayasree, respectively. It is their grievance that though they are original owners and possessors of the aforesaid land, the respondents are taking steps to dispossess them. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that purchase of aforesaid land by the petitioners was in contravention of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act 9 of 1977, as such, orders of eviction were passed on 23.06.2007 and the petitioners were evicted. It is further stated that against the said eviction order, petitioners carried the matter in appeal before the second respondent/appellate authority - Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, who in turn, by order bearing Ref.D/460/2008, dated 28.04.2008, allowed the said appeal and set aside the order, dated 23.06.2007, passed by the third respondent - Tahsildar, Rajanagaram Mandal, East Godavari District. When the matter is taken up, learned counsel for the petitioners has produced before this Court a copy of the order, dated 28.04.2008, passed by the second respondent/appellate authority, who specifically recorded a finding for restoration of possession also. It is submitted that pursuant to such order of the appellate authority, possession is also handed over by conducting a panchanama. In view of the order passed by the second respondent restoring the possession of the petitioners over the land in question, I dispose of the writ petition with the direction not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject land. However, it is made clear that if there is any further violation on the part of the petitioners, this order will not preclude the respondents to take steps in accordance with law. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 2nd NOVEMBER, 2010. kvni