Geddada Ramana vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4705 AP

               HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI

                       Main Case: W. P. No.22823 of 2021

                              PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.   Date                             ORDER                               OFFICE
No.                                                                         NOTE
04 18.11.2021 KVL, J

                               WP No.22823 of 2021

                 Notice before admission, returnable in four weeks.
                 Learned Government Pleader seeks time to file
              counter-affidavit.
                                   IA No.1 of 2021
                  Case of the petitioner is that, he is having ancestral
              property bearing D.No.1-336 in an extent of Ac.0.01
              cent in Sy.No.21, 17 situated in Addateegala village &
              Mandal, East Godavari District; the said property is
              situated in the scheduled area in East Godavari District;
              he is not a tribe and he is running a small tailoring shop
              in the said premises; the 5th respondent filed a

complaint before the 3rd respondent under Section 3(1) of A.P. Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulations 1959 (for short 'the Regulations 1959') as amended by Regulations 1/70 for restoration of the said property by evicting the petitioner; the 3rd respondent has passed an order of ejectment on 05.07.2013; aggrieved by same, petitioner filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent and the said appeal was allowed on 09.03.2018; since the order is not communicated to the petitioner, he is not aware of the same; while so, respondents 4 and 5 came to the subject property on 07.09.2021 and served a notice dated 07.09.2021; at that time, petitioner came to know about the orders passed by the 2nd respondent on 09.03.2018; on 14.09.2021, respondents 4 and 5 came to the subject shop and took possession of the subject shop by putting a seal and lock on the shop; petitioner filed a revision before the 1st respondent on 21.09.2021 along with an application to condone the delay and to grant stay; the 1st respondent did not take any action in the said revision till now. Hence, the writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment in 'Maillapalli Chinakoteswara Rao vs. The Mandal Revenue Officer1' and submits that as per Rule 7(4) of the A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Rules, 1969, the order for restoration of possession by the Agency Divisional Officer or other Officer has to be executed like a decree for ejectment. The impugned notice dated 07.09.2021 issued by the Tahsildar intimating the petitioner that the possession will be taken within seven days appears to be prima- facie without following the procedure contemplated under the Rules/Regulation. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to remove the lock and key, which was put on 14.09.2021 to the petitioner's shop bearing D. No.1-336 in an extent of Ac.0.01 cents situated in Sy.No.21, 17 of Addateegala village & Mandal, East Godavari District. It is needless to state that this order will be subject to the orders that will be passed by the Revisional Authority in the stay petition or the condone delay petition in revision.

List the matter after eight (8) weeks.

______ KVL, J

BSS

2005(3) ALT 88