( 1 ) HEARD both the sides.

( 2 ) SINCE the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, except minor details like dates and places of tender notification, they are being disposed of by this common order.

( 3 ) THE petitioners are the societies consisting of the members belonging to the scheduled tribes. Their grievance in both the writ petitions is that the Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (for short the Corporation), which is an instrumentality of the State is leasing the stalls/shops in the Bus Stations situated in agency areas, to non-tribals by inviting tender, which is contrary to Section 3 of Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulations, 1959 (for short the Regulations ) and also contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Samatha v. State of A. P. (1997) 8 SCC 191. The petitioners also relied on a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court reported in Pingili Pratap Reddy v. Dandu Pullam Raju (1989) 3 Andh LT 319, and stated that any transfer of immovable property contrary to Section 3 of the Regulations is null and void. Hence they sought for setting aside the tender notifications and consequently allotm