ORDER :

The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that considering their social status being landless poor and recognizing that they have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the land to an extent of Ac.2-50 cents each in Survey No. 395/D1 of Abdullapuram village, Velgodu Mandal, Kurnool District, the Government assigned the said extents in favour of the petitioners through patta in R.Dis.No.249/DIR/1409, dated 05.04.2000 and their names were mutated in the revenue records and pattadar passbooks and title deeds were also issued to them for their respective extents of lands. The 3rd respondent- Joint Collector, Kurnool, basing on the complaint said to have been made by the 6th respondent, cancelled the assignment pattas granted in favour of the petitioners, vide orders in R.C.E2/790/2004, dated 02.04.2017. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred statutory appeal before the 2nd respondent-The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration vide Appeal No.BCW1/80/2017 on 22.05.2017 and questioning the inaction of the 2nd respondent in taking up the appeal, the petitioners filed W.P.No.19185 of 2017 and this Hon’ble Court disposed of the writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to take up the appeal and to pass orders on the stay application. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent vide orders dated 24.01.2019 dismissed the appeal justifying the action of the 3rd respondent-joint collector in cancelling the assignments and further directed the 3rd respondent to enquire into the matter. Aggrieved by the said dismissal order dated 24.01.2019, the petitioners preferred this writ petition.

2. The respondent-Tahsildar, filed counter, denying the averments of the petition inter alia contending that the land in an extent of Ac.5-00 cents in Survey No.395/D1 was originally assigned to one Madiga Pedda Gajjalu vide R.Dis.No.181/DAR/1377, dated 20.10.1967 by the then Independent Deputy Tahsildar, Atmakur, considering his eligibility and by following the procedure and the said Madiga Pedda Gajjalu had been in possession and enjoyment of the said land and continued cultivation upto 1993 and thereafter the said land was erroneously assigned to one Nagamani @ Nagamma on 08.09.1993 and the said Nagamani relinquished her patta in favour of the petitioners, who are her close blood relatives, and accordingly, the petitioners got D-pattas irregularly and erroneously, without there being cancellation of the original D-patta and the second D-patta. It is further stated that, the 6th respondent, who is son of Madiga Pedda Gajjalu, on behalf of all the successors filed objection for cancellation of irregular assignments and the Joint Collector, Kurnool, who is competent to decide the issue under B.S.O. 15(18), after verification of connected records, cancelled the irregular D-pattas granted to the petitioners and the Tahsildar was directed to restore the said land to legal heirs under Section 4(b)(ii) of the P.O.T. Act, 1977 and the appeal preferred by the petitioners assailing the orders of the Joint Collector was also dismissed directing the Joint Collector to enquire into the sale agreement executed by the original assignee Madiga Pedda Gajjalu in the year 1993 by violating the conditions of assignment and delivering possession of the land by him to one Thulasanna and whether the family members of the original assignee has land in excess of the limit under the provisions of BSO and A.P. Assigned Lands (POT) Act and further directed the Tahsildar to restore the land to the legal heirs of the original assignee. The impugned orders came to be passed, after giving opportunity to both the parties and the same needs no interference and prayed to dismissed the writ petition.

3. The 6th respondent filed counter denying the averments of the writ petition, inter alia contending that, the original assignee borrowed amount from one G.Tulasanna and the said Tulasanna obtained the signatures of the original assignee at the time of lending the amount and created an