D. REDDAPPA REDDI, J.

( 1 ) THESE four writ petitions arise under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas land Transfer Regulation, 1959 (for short "the Regulation") as amended from time to time. It would be convenient to dispose them of together since common questions arise in all the matters.

( 2 ) THE material facts are: All the petitioners are non-tribals. They purchased lands situated in the Agency tracts from non-tribals through sale deeds registered in the year 1978. On complaints filed by the Special Deputy tahsildar, Tribal Welfare No. l, Eluru, the third respondent viz. , the Agency divisional Officer-cum-Special Deputy Collector, Kota Ramachandrapuram, west Godavari District, Eluru, initiated proceedings for ejectment of the petitioners under Section 3 (2) (a) of the Regulation. After due enquiry, he passed orders of ejectment on 30th September, 1982. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred appeals to the second respondent viz. , the Agent to the government, West Godavari District. The said appeals were dismissed by separate orders dated 4th day of November, 1983. They carried the matter through a Counsel to the first respondent viz. , the Government of Andhra pradesh by way of revision petitions under Section 6; but they were also dismissed by proceedings dated 4-5-1984 and 14-5-1984. Review petitions filed nearly ten years thereafter on the ground that the proceedings dated 4-5-1984 and 14-5-1984 were not communicated to the petitioners, were also rejected as not maintainable by the impugned proceedings dated 28th day of November, 1994.

( 3 ) IN the previous round of litigation i. e. , in Writ Petition Nos. 12021,12054, 12065 and 12066 of 1994, it was admitted that the petitioners were dispossessed from the subject lands. However, in the affidavits filed in support of the present writ petitions, it is stated that the petitioners have raised cashew and tobacco crops. When they came up for admission on the 25th day of January, 1995, this court, while giving time to the learned Government Pleader for obtaining instructions, granted interim directions to the respondents to permit the petitioners to cultivate the subject lands for a period of eight weeks which were later extended. On behalf of the respondents, counter affidavit along with a petition to vacate interim directions has been filed in each case.

( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners raises four principal contentions: they are (1) The transfer in favour of the petitioners is not hit by the provisions of section 3 (1) (a) of the Regulation as they were put in possession of the subject lands pursuant to the agreements of sale dated 15-4-1969 and 15-7-1969. (2) The petitioners being small farmers are entitled to the benefit envisaged under G. O. Ms. No. 129, Social Welfare Department, dated 13-8-1979. (3) The proceedings of the first respondent dated 4-5-1984 and 14-5-1984,rejecting the petitioners revision petitions without giving opportunity of being heard to them are unsustainable in view of proviso to Sec. 6. (4) The proceedings of the first respondent dated 4-5-1984 and 14-5-1984 were not communicated to the petitioners and they came to know of the same only in the year 1994 when they were sought to be ejected. Hence, there are no laches on their part in filing the present writ petitions.

( 5 ) THE first contention centres around the provisons of Section 3 (1) (a) and the definition of transfer as defined in Section 2 (g ). Section 3 (1) (a) reads:"3. TRANSFER OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY BY A MEMBER OF A scheduled TRIBE: (1) (a) Notwithstanding anything in any enactment, rule or law in force in the Agency tracts, any transfer of immovable property situated in the Agency tracts by a person, whether or not such person is a member of a Scheduled Tribe, shall be absolutely null and void, unless such transfer is made in favour of a person, who is a member of a Scheduled Tribe or a society registered or deemed to be registered under the Andhra Pradesh Co-operat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document