IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 14143 of 2008 Between: S.V.Mahesh Madhava Kumar Reddy, S/o. Venkata Ramana Reddy, R/o. Badvel(V&M), Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of A.P., Rep by its Prinicpal Secretary, Revenue(Land Acquisition) Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad-22 2 The District Collector, Kadapa District, Kadapa. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Rajampet Division, Kadapa District. 4 The Tahsildar, Atlur Mandal, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus setting aside the Order, Dt. 27-05-2008 passed by the 3rd Respondent in Ref.H/276/2008, and the Order, Dt. 12.07.2007 passed by the 4th Respondent in Ref.No.B/8/2007 and consequently direct the Respondents to initiate Proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and pay compensation to the Petitioner, before taking possession of his lands, an extent of Acs. 5.07 cents in Sy.No.301 and an extent of Acs.4.92 Cents in sy.No.326/1 of Yerraballi village, Atlur Mandal, Kadapa District. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.ROY REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 14143 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking Mandamus to declare the order dated 27.5.2008 passed by 4th respondent in Ref.H/276/2008 and the order dated 12.7.2007 passed by the 3rd respondent in Ref.No.B/8/2007 as arbitrary and illegal; consequently to direct the respondents to initiate proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and pay compensation to the petitioner before taking possession of his lands to an extent of Ac.5- 07 cents in S.No.301 and an extent of Ac.4.90 cents in S.No.326/1 of Yerraballi village, Atlur Mandal, Kadapa District. It appears, some Ex-Servicemen were assigned with the abovementioned lands and they had mortgaged the said lands for obtaining agricultural loans in Kadapa District Cooperative Central Bank. When the loan was not redeemed, the Bank had to taken recourse to auction the said lands under the provisions of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act and the petitioner purchased the same in the said auction. Subsequently, the said lands are sought to be taken possession of for public purposes, namely, Excavation of S.P.V.B.R. Canal and conservation of Kalivikodi endangered species and proceedings under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 were initiated by the 4th respondent treating the lands of the petitioner as assigned lands and directing resumption of the same on the ground that the sale of the said lands in favour of the petitioner is illegal for the reason, firstly, that the Ex-Serviceman is not supposed to mortgage the lands in favour of the Bank and, secondly, that the Bank has no authority to sell the same. As against the said order, the petitioner preferred appeal before the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent disposed of the said appeal granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. The counter affidavit filed by the respondents also reiterates the same grounds on which the resumption order was passed. There is no necessity of going into all the details. It is not in dispute that Ex-Service Men, when the land is assigned to them, can mortgage the land for the purpose of obtaining loan, after 10 years from the date of assignment. B.S.O. 15 as well as G.O.Ms.No.1117 dated 11.11.1993 also enable the Ex-Serviceman to sell the assigned land after a period of 10 years. Further, by the time auction was conducted by the bank for the purpose of recovering its loans, it was more than 10 years from the date of assignment. Therefore, it cannot be said that the auction conducted by the bank is arbitrary and illegal and the petitioner cannot be found fault with, for purchasing the lands in the said auction. Under those circumstances, I am of the opinion that the impugned resumption order passed by the 4th respondent dated 12.7.2007 as confirmed by the 3rd respondent vide proceedings dated 27.5.2008 are illegal and arbitrary and liable to be set aside. The said impugned proceedings are accordingly set aside. The respondents are accordingly directed to take steps under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, if they are intending to acquire the lands of the petitioner for any public purpose, and pay compensation for the lands acquired, as required under the provisions of the said Act. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. C.V. RAMULU, J. Date: 18-3-2009. MVB.