THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5534 of 2008 ORDER: Though the matter is at the interlocutory stage, in view of the stand of the respondents in the counter-affidavit, this writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and being disposed of by this order. In the writ petition, petitioner seeks a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking steps to dispossess him from the land admeasuring Ac.0.70 cents covered by Survey No.730 of Yellamandu Village, Narasaraopet Mandal, Guntur District, as illegal. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner and possessor of aforesaid piece of land, which was originally purchased by his late wife by a registered sale deed vide document No.5165/99, dated 15.07.1999. Particulars of earlier sale deed are also given in the writ affidavit. It is his grievance that though the land in question is not an assigned one, the respondents are taking steps to evict him from the said land without following due process of law. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that originally, aforesaid piece of land was assigned in 1981 and the same was transferred, which was ultimately purchased by the wife of the petitioner. It is further stated that the third respondent/primary authority – Tahsildar, Narasaraopet Mandal, Guntur District, passed orders of resumption of aforesaid land under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’) on 11.04.2007, as against which, the petitioner preferred appeal before the second respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Guntur District, as provided under Section 4-A of the Act. The same ended in dismissal by order, dated 29.02.2008. It is also stated that without availing further remedy of revision, this writ petition is filed by the petitioner and interim orders are obtained. During the course of hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that order, dated 29.02.2008, was not served on the petitioner. There is also no averment in the counter-affidavit with regard to particulars of service of aforesaid order on the petitioner. As the petitioner has not questioned the validity of the said order in the writ petition and as evident from the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents that the appeal filed by the petitioner is disposed of by the second respondent by order, dated 29.02.2008, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to avail the remedy of revision within a period of two (2) months from today. If any such revision is filed, the revisional authority shall accept it without raising any objection with regard to limitation, consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. There shall be a further direction to the respondents that no steps shall be taken for dispossession of the petitioner from the land in question, for a period of two (2) months from today. It is open to the petitioner to obtain appropriate orders from the revisional authority in the revision to be filed by him. Subject to the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 21st JUNE, 2011. kvni