THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.23707 OF 2018

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and perused the entire material on record.

2. This writ petition is filed questioning the proceedings issued by the respondent No.2 herein i.e., the Collector, Karimnagar District vide No.E1/1074/2018, dated 26.05.2018 by directing the respondent No.4 i.e., Tahsildar, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District to resume the land to an extent of Acs.2.00 guntas out of Acs.5.36 guntas in Sy.No.936/2 situated at Indurthi Village, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, even though there is no violations of conditions of patta granted in favour of the husband of the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 26.05.2018 was passed by the respondent No.2 basing on the report submitted by the respondent No.3-Revenue Divisional Officer and directed the Tahsildar and Deputy Tahsildar in independent charge, who are the assigning authorities should be the authorities competent to order of resumption in case of a breach to the conditions. Contrary to the same, the respondent No.2 has directed the respondent No.4 to resume the land as per the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and the same is illegal and arbitrary and requested to set aside the directions issued by the respondent No.2.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue basing on counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.4 submits that the respondent No.4 has not acted upon the impugned letter issued by the respondent No.2 on 26.05.2018 and it was only relating to re-iteration of Government policy/instructions, but not any orders. The matter is under verification at the level of the respondent No.4 and the respondent No.4 has not initiated any steps in this matter till today. Even though no process was started by the respondent No.4 and no notice was issued to the writ petitioner basing on the instructions issued by the respondent No.2, the respondent No.4 will not resume the land without following the process as contemplated under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and requested to pass appropriate orders.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 endorsing the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

6. After hearing both sides this Court is of the considered view that the impugned proceedings dated 26.05.2018 issued by the respondent No.2 is the re- iteration of Government policy/instructions and the procedure has to be followed under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 but in the operative portion, the respondent No.2 has directed the respondent No.4 to resume the land, in view of the same, the said portion of orders has to be set aside and more over as per the averments made in the counter-affidavit, the respondent No.4 has not taken any action basing on the impugned proceedings passed by the respondent No.2.

7. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of by setting aside the operative portion in the impugned proceedings dated 26.05.2018 and the direction to the respondent No.4-Tahsildar to resume the land as per the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, is hereby set aside. If the respondent No.4 intends to take action, they shall follow the procedure as per the Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, after issuing notice to the petitioner.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

______________________

JUSTICE K.SARATH Date: 25.07.2025 EDS