Ghulam Mohammed, J.

The Division Bench of this Court by order dated 28-9-2006 allowed this writ petition, which is in the following terms:

"In view of the decision taken by this Bench in Jonnalagadda Samrajyam v. The Registrar, Special Court Coustituted Under The AP Land Grabbing (P) Act, 1982, in WP No.19619 of 2002 and batch, dated 23-8-2006 (1996 (5) ALT 690 (D.B.)), the instant writ petition shall have to be disposed of in terms thereof. The applicant herein is statutory authority, namely, Andhra University. It filed an application under Section 7-A of the AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, against the writ petitioner. Such an application cannot be maintained is the decision of this Court in the judgment referred to hereinabove.

The writ petition is, therefore, allowed. But, under the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.

2. It is on record that the judgment in Jonnalagadda Samrajyam v. The Registrar, Special Court Coustituted Under The AP Land Grabbing (P) Act, 1982, in WP No.19619 of 2002 and batch, dated 23-8-2006 (1996 (5) ALT 690 (D.B.)), was subject matter of review in Rev.WPMPs No.30191 of 2006 and batch. The Division Bench of this Court reviewed the judgment referred to above and allowed the review petitions, in result the judgment in Jonnalagadda Samrajyam's case has been reversed. Perhaps, in view of this, the applicant-Andhra University, inasmuch as, this writ petition filed by the respondent in the LGC was allowed following the decision in Jonnalagadda Samrajyam's case, and that decision has been reversed in review petitions, filed SLP being SLP (C) No.4436 of 2007 before the Apex Court. The Apex Court by order dated 3-7-2007 passed the following order:

"Counsel for the respondents is present on caveat and with the consent of the parties, we dispose of the matter at this stage. We have heard counsel for the parties. Delay condoned. Leave granted.

In the instant case, the High Court relying upon an earlier decision of the High Court held that the land belonging to the appellant-University cannot be the subject matter of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982. It is brought to our notice that the aforesaid earlier judgment of the High Court has been reviewed by the High Court in Review Writ Petition Miscellaneous Petition Nos.30191/ 2006, 30098/2006 etc. etc. and has been reversed. A copy of the said judgment has been produced before us. In this view of the matter, we dispose of this appeal by setting aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court and remitting the matter to the High Court to reconsider the matter on merits in the light of the judgment of the High Court in Review Writ Petition Miscellaneous Petition Nos.30191 /2006, 30098/2006 etc. etc. including the question of applicability of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982. It appears that an interim order was operating while the matter was pending before the High Court. The said order shall continue to operate unless the High Court vacates the same or modifies the same. The appeal is allowed. No order as to the costs.

1. 3. Pursuant to the directions of the Apex Court in SLP, the matter is listed before us. The instant writ petition is filed against the order dated 2-1-1996 passed in LGC No.31 of 1989 by the District Judge at Visakhapatnam.

.4. The writ petitioner herein (since deceased) by LR is the respondent in the LGC and the Andhra University, Visakhapatnam, represented by its Registrar, is the applicant in LGC. For brevity, the parties hereinafter will be referred to, as they were arrayed in LGC. The applicant filed the LGC under sub-section (1) of Section 7-A of the AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, (for short, `the Act') seeking eviction of the respondent-writ petitioner herein from the petition schedule mentioned land measuring an extent of 1080 sq. yards of site out of Ac.2-87 cents situate in Sy.No.34 of

.Sivajipalem, Defence, Visakhapatnam, (for short, `th