T. BHASKAR RAO, J.

( 1 ) THESE writ petitions are filed assailing the order of the Mandal Revenue of ficer-2nd respondent herein cancelling the assignment of the petitioners and resuming the lands under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of transfers) Act, 1977 (Act No. IX of 1977 ).

( 2 ) THE case of the petitioners is that the lands in their possession were originally assigned to the assignees on payment of market value and granted d form pattas to the assignees. Thereafter the assignees sold their lands to the third parties including (that of) the present petitioners. The M. R. O. , 2nd respondent herein noticing that the lands were transferred by the original assignees in favour of the petitioners, issued a show-cause notice stating why the assignments should not be cancelled as the assignees have violated the provisions of Section 3 of Act IX of 1977. It is the case of the petitioners that the assignees have purchased theland from the Government on payment of market value who in turn sold their lands to the petitioners on payment of market value only. Further, it is their case that the note appended to Condition No. l in d form patta postulates that non-alienation is not a bar if the assignment was made on collection of market value. During the months of June and July, 1989 the Mandal Revenue Office issued notices alleging that the transaction between the petitioners and the assignees is in contravention of the provisions of Section 3 of Act IX of 1977, for which the petitioners submitted their explanation stating that the Act has no application to the assignments made to the assignees as per para 1 (8) of G. O. Ms. No. 1142 dated 18-6-1954 as the assignment was made only on payment of market value. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they submitted explanation bringing to the notice of mandal Revenue Officer certain material facts, the M. R. O. , passed the impugned orders which are contrary to law. Hence they filed these writ petitions.

( 3 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that Act no. IX of 1977 will not apply to the lands assigned on payment of market value as the note appended to Condition No. 1 of d form patta makes it amply clear that the bar of alienation does not apply to the lands assigned on payment of market value; therefore, the assignments cannot be cancelled by applying the provisions of Act No. IX of 1977.

( 4 ) ON the other hand, it is the contention of the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondents, that once the assigned lands are alienated, it comes within the purview of the provisions of Act No. DC of 1977 and therefore the authorities have a right to cancel the assignments.

( 5 ) IN view of the rival contentions put form, it is imperative to find out whether the lands assigned on payment of market value prescribed any condition that non-alienation will not apply to the cases where the lands are assigned on payment of market value and Act No. IX of 1977 will not apply to the assignees of the lands in question?

( 6 ) TO appreciate the above requirements, it would be relevant to read certain provisions of the Act there. Section 2 (1) defines "assigned land" which reads:"assigned land means lands assigned by the Government to the landless poor persons under the rules for the time being in force, subject to the condiction of non-alienation and includes lands allotted or transferred to landless poor persons under the relevant law for the time being in force relating to land ceilings; and the word "assigned" shall be construed accordingly. "section 3 prohibitstransfer of assigned lands; Section 4 provides consequences of breach of provisions of Section 3, empowering the person authorised by the collector to take action for resumption of the land, Section 4-A provides for appeal and Section 4-B provides for revision; Section 5 provides prohibition of registration of assigned lands; Section 7 provides for penalty and Section

Click Here to Read the rest of this document