IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.24154 of 2014 BETWEEN Papineni Ekambareswari and two others.
AND ... PETITIONERS The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: MR. B.DEVADAS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Petitioners are, admittedly, purchasers from one Pondugula Rajaratnam and are aggrieved by the impugned proceedings dated 05.05.2005 wherein it is stated that the land in question is an assigned land, which was already resumed by the proceedings of Mandal Revenue Officer in Rc.900/2003-D dated 17.06.2003.
2. Even as per the averments in para 6 of the affidavit, since the aforesaid vendor of the petitioners did not submit any explanation to the show cause notice, the land is alleged to have been resumed on 17.06.2003.
3. Petitioners, however, submit that they are not bound either by the order of the resumption dated 05.05.2005 or by the proceedings dated 17.06.2003, as they have registered sale deeds in their favour dated 06.01.1995 and 11.01.1996. The contention of the petitioners is that by accepting the stamp duty and registration fee, the Government is deemed to have accepted the title of the petitioners. Petitioners also claim to be in possession and alleging that the fourth respondent attempted to interfere with their possession on 09.08.2014, they have filed a complaint in prajavani dated 11.08.2014 and filed the present writ petition.
4. Such of those persons, against whom the resumption order dated 05.05.2005 is passed, had approached this Court in WP.No.23423 of 2014, inter alia, contending that the appeal preferred by them before the Joint Collector is pending and meanwhile, no alienation of the land should be made. It is, however, common case of all the parties that resumption proceedings were implemented.
The said writ petition is disposed of today on the basis of the instructions of the learned Assistant Government that the appeal before the Joint Collector has since been disposed of on 28.08.2014 giving liberty to take appropriate steps in pursuance of the said order of the Joint Collector.
Since the petitioners herein also claim through one of such assignees, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J September 11, 2014 DSK