Date of reserved for orders : ------ Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2026 Date of uploading : 03. APHC010019562018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY,THE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1113 of 2018 Between: 1. AKULA VERIKATESWARLU, S/O.NAGAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.21 SATTENAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. AKULA VISWESWARA RAO, S/O.NAGAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.18 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, SATTENAPALLI MANDAL, SATTENAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be 1 ------ Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2026 .07.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1113 of 2018 AKULA VERIKATESWARLU, S/O.NAGAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.21-2-62/A, BEHIND SIVALAYAM BAZAAR, TENAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. AKULA VISWESWARA RAO, S/O.NAGAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.18-9-75, SATTENAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPT, SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR THE TAHSILDAR, SATTENAPALLI MANDAL, SATTENAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA AKULA VERIKATESWARLU, S/O.NAGAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 62/A, BEHIND SIVALAYAM BAZAAR, AKULA VISWESWARA RAO, S/O.NAGAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 75, SATTENAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR THE TAHSILDAR, SATTENAPALLI MANDAL, SATTENAPALLI, ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be 2 pleased to issue a Writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ order and to set aside the impugned order of 4th respondent dated 15.12.2017 in R.C.No.150312017-B with regard to the resumption of land in an extent of Ac.3.37 cents in Sy.No.9-2, an extent of Ac.0.61 IA cents in Sy.NO.8-A1 and an extent of Ac.0.01cents in Sy.No.8-E of Sattenapalli Village and Mandal, Guntur District as the same was passed without conducting any enquiry or giving an opportunity to the petitioner and also in violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Prohibition of Transfer Act 1977 and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from her lands in an extent of Ac.3.37 cents in Sy.No.9-2, an extent of Ac.0.61 1/2 cents in Sy.N0.8-A1 and an extent of Ac.0.01cents in Sy.No.8-E of Sattenapalli Village and Mandal, Guntur District by suspending the operation and effect of the proceedings of the 4th respondent in R.C.No.1503/2017-B dated 15.12.2017, in the interest of justice and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to grant leave to the Respondent No.4 in the Writ Petition No. 1113 of 2018 to file counter affidavit in the above Writ Petition and pass such other order or orders in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. G L NAGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1113 of 2018 ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed to set aside the impugned order of Respondent No.4, dated 15.12.2017 in R.C.No.1503/2017-B with regard to the resumption of land in an extent of Ac.3.37 cents in Sy.No.9-2, an extent of Ac.0.61 ½ cents in Sy.No.8-A1 and an extent of Ac.0.01 cents in Sy.No.8-E of Sattenapalli Village and Mandal, Guntur District as the same was passed without conducting any enquiry or giving an opportunity to the petitioner and also in violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Prohibition of Transfer Act 1977. 2. The Petitioners are permanent residents of Sattenapalli and are landless poor persons. The Petitioners requested the government officials for allotment of a land to them under landless poor persons under a scheme. Accordingly, the Respondent/ Tahsildar advised them to cultivate the land in an extent of Ac.3.37 cents in Sy.No.9-2, an extent of Ac.0.61½ cents in Sy.No.8-A1 and an extent of Ac.0.01 cents in Sy.No.8-E of Sattenapalli Village and Mandal, Guntur District, as the said lands were abandoned by the earlier assignees. Thereafter, the government officials recognizing their possession and enjoyment have assigned the land and issued Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed vide Patta No.1184 in the year 2004 and after demise of their mother, the Petitioners became absolute owners and possessors of the subject land. 4 3. While the matter stood thus, on 29.11.2017, the Respondent No.4 issued a notice under Form-II, dated 21.11.2017 under Rule 3 of the A.P.Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfer) Rule, 2007 on the name of Petitioners mother alleging that the Petitioners are in illegal possession of the land, which was issued to the landless poor persons for agriculture in contravention to the provisions of sub-section (2), Section 3 of A.P. Assigned Land Prohibition of Transfer Act, 1977 and instructed the Petitioner to submit written explanation within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice and in failure, they will dispossess them from the land and will take possession. For which, the Petitioners submitted an explanation on 12.12.2017 duly explaining the facts and also with a request to conduct an enquiry with regard to possession of subject land and drop further proceedings. 4. However, the grievance of the Petitioners in the present Writ Petition is that the Respondent No.4 even without considering the explanation submitted by the Petitioner, passed the impugned orders dated 15.12.2017 seeking resumption of the land without conducting any enquiry and without affording any opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners. Aggrieved by which, the present Writ Petition came to be filed. 5. When the Writ Petition came up for admission on 05.01.2018, this Court passed the interim order in I.A.No.1 of 2018 that “Since the impugned order does not give details of when the assignment is made and whether assignment was subject to a prohibition to alienate the land, there shall be interim direction as prayed for”. 5 6. The Respondent No.4 has filed a detailed Counter-Affidavit duly stating that previously land to an extent of Ac. 8.78 cents in Sy.No.8 and Ac. 6.96 cents in Sy.No.9 admeasuring Ac.15.7 cents of Sattenapalli Village and Mandal has been assigned to various beneficiaries viz., P.Venkata Marthamma and 10 others. On 21.11.2017 a report has been received from the then Mandal Revenue Inspector-I, in-charge of Sattenapalli Village stating that the land to an extent of Ac.15.74 cents which was assigned to the beneficiaries in Sy.No.8 and Sy.No.9 of Sattenapalli Village was violated and transferred to other than assignees and recommended to issue Form-I notice to the original assignees and Form-II notices to the present enjoyers. Accordingly, as per A.P.Assigned Land Prohibition of Transfer Act, 1977 under Section 3 and 4, Form-I and Form-II notices were prepared and issued to the original assignees and present enjoyers in Sy.No.8 and Sy.No.9 of Sattenapalli Village viz., Form No.I issued to P. Venkata Marthamma and 9 others and issued Form No.II to the enjoyers viz., Akula Venkata Ramanamma and 12 others respectively. 7. On perusal of the impugned orders, it can be observed that the notice in Form-I was issued to the original beneficiaries, whereas notice under Form.II was issued to the enjoyers, it also appears that the Respondents failed to conduct any enquiry on the assignment granted in favour of the Petitioners and have not stated whatever the assignment was subject to a prohibition of alienation of the land. 6 8. It is not the case of the Petitioners also that they have transferred the land in favour of third parties in contravention to the proviso under Section 3 of the A.P. Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977. Their case is only on the ground that previous District Collector, Guntur has reviewed about availability of the land for construction of houses under housing for all scheme has issued instructions to find out government land for the above said purpose and in that regard the previous revenue authorities having identified the land to an extent of Ac.15.7 cents in Sy.No.8 and Sy.No.9 of Sattenapalli Village, which was classified as ‘Dotted land”, which was assigned to 9 beneficiaries and also noticed that out of 9 beneficiaries except one beneficiary i.e Rajasekharuni Satyanarayana, who was assigned in Sy.No. 8-A2 to an extent of Ac. 2.50 cents and all other assignees have transferred their assigned lands to others and violated the conditions of Assigned lands and attracted POT Act, 1977 have assigned the said land in favour of the Petitioner’s deceased mother. 9. However, the impugned order does not disclose as to whether the assignment was made with a condition not to alienate the subject land, that the Petitioners have purchased the said land in contravention to the conditions attracted under POT Act, 1977. 10. According to Rule 3, notice in Form-I and II shall be served on both transferee and transferor, if the assignee contravenes, the Government proposes to resume the land for contravention of Section 3 of Act 9 of 1977. 7 11. Having observed so, relying on the judgment reported in “M/s. Sudalagunta Sugars Limited Vs. The Joint Collector, Chittoor1” this Court has allowed the Writ Petition No.1312 of 2020 declaring the impugned notice therein issued by the Tahsildar as illegal and arbitrary and set aside the same. 12. In the present case also, notice issued to the Petitioners in Form I and Form-II is not in compliance of Rule 3 of the Rules framed under the Act in 2007. As the facts of the present case are akin to the facts in W.P.No.1312 of 2020, this Court is inclined to pass same order as in W.P.No.1312 of 2020. 13. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, declaring the impugned proceedings dated 15.12.2017 vide R.C.No.1503/2017-B issued by Respondent No.4 as illegal and arbitrary, consequently the same is hereby set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 23.06.2026 KK Whether the order is: Speaking Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable. 1 (2017) 2 ALD 529