As the subject matter of both these Writ Petitions is common, they are heard and being disposed of together by this Common Judgment.

The background facts: The property in dispute is Ac.10-00 in Sy.No.36 of Gopanpalli village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District (hereinafter referred to as “the subject land”). The subject land was a Government land. It was assigned to one Babu Rao Joshi in the year 1961. His name was incorporated in the revenue record (Faisal Patti) for the year 1961-62. Supplementary Sethwar vide File No.G1/1211/1963, dated 11-3-1964 was issued by the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records. The name of Babu Rao Joshi was mutated in all the revenue records, such as Vasool Baqui, Pahani etc. Babu Rao Joshi died in the year 1967. The name of his son, Arun Kumar Joshi, was mutated in the revenue records in the year 1968. Arun Kumar Joshi sold the subject land through registered sale deed dated 5-6-1980 to one Shaik Ashwak Ahmed s/o. Shaik Umar. The said Shaik Ashwak Ahmed has in turn sold the subject land in favour of one V. Gourinath, the father of V. Srinivas, the petitioner in W.P.No.21352/2012.

M. Lakshmikanthaiah, the petitioner in W.P.No.20676/2012, claimed that V. Gourinath has sold the subject land to him through a General Power of Attorney-cum-Agreement of sale stated to have been executed on 18-6-1995 and possession was delivered to him. This fact is, however, seriously disputed by V. Srinivas. It is the pleaded case of V. Srinivas that his father V. Gourinath died on 23-12-1988 and that during his life time he has executed a Will bequeathing the subject land to him. He has averred that as his father died as far back 23-12-1988, the case of M. Lakshmikanthaiah that his father executed an unregistered Power of Attorney-cum-Agreement of sale on 18-6-1995 is highly improbable and that the said document was created for the purpose of making a false claim.

Be that as it may, the Tahsildar (Deputy Collector), Serilingampally-respnodent No.4 in both these Writ Petitions, initiated proceedings under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short "the Act") for resumption of the subject land on the directions given by the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District-respondent No.2. Notice dated 15-12-2003 in Form-I was allegedly sent to the first purchaser of the subject land-Shaik Ashwak Ahmed to show cause as to why he should not be summarily evicted from the subject land and any crop or product raised or building or other constructions erected or anything deposited therein should not be forfeited. The said notice has returned unserved with the endorsement “No such named person in this house”. Respondent No.4 allegedly got the notice published on the land and also in the village on 29-12-2003. Respondent No.4 has passed the resumption order in proceedings No.B/2545/2003, dated 16-1-2004, wherein he has stated that inspite of publication of the notice, the purchaser has neither appeared in person nor filed any representation in writing. Respondent No.4 held that the subject land assigned to Babu Rao Joshi was sold by his son through sale deed dated 5-6-1980 in favour of Shaik Shafiq Ahmed in violation of Section 3(2) of the Act and therefore the same is resumed.

Feeling aggrieved by the said order, M. Lakshmikanthaiah filed an appeal before respondent No.3. The said appeal was dismissed vide order No.D/1515/2007, dated 17-10-2007. M. Lakshmikanthaiah filed a revision petition under Section 4-B of the Act before respondent No.2. In the said revision petition he has pleaded, as he also did before the appellate authority, that the subject land was assigned to Babu Rao Joshi under the Political Sufferers’ quota vide file No.A6/5456/1961; that as per G.O.Ms.No.1745, Revenue Department, dated 28-8-1959, Political Sufferers have been permitted to sell away the lands assigned to them without being subjected to any conditions. It was therefore the pleaded case of M. Lakshmikanthai