Vadapalli Satyavathi , Bandreddi Satyavathi, v. State Of Andhra Pradesh,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * WRIT PETITION No. 26254 of 2015 BETWEEN V.Satyavathi ... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others ...RESPONDENTS Date of Order pronounced: 19.08.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether his Lordship wish to see the Yes/No fair copy of the Judgment?

ORDER:- Heard.

2. Petitioner apprehends dispossession notwithstanding that she had already filed a reply on 14.07.2015 to the notice issued by the third respondent under Rule 3 of the A.P.Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Rules dated 21.05.2015. Petitioner states that she has been enjoying the property in R.S.No.126/2 of Nagayalanka Village for an extent of Ac.0.30 cents in which she has constructed a house which is being assessed to the property tax year after year. It is further stated that she is in possession from 1942 onwards. Neither the Government nor any assignee has any interest of title on the said land. Petitioner states that she was given a notice by the third respondent dated 21.05.2015 alleging that she is a transferee of an assigned land which was said to have been assigned to Sala Nancharamma.

Petitioner gave a reply to the said notice dated 14.07.2015 denying the said claim and ascertaining her title and possession and while no orders are stated to have been passed by the third respondent, petitioner now apprehends that steps are being taken by the third respondent to dispossess her.

3. In view of the fact that the petitioner has already given explanation to the show cause notice issued by the third respondent, it is appropriate that the third respondent considers the said explanation and pass appropriate final order and communicate the same to the petitioner. Respondent No.3 shall also fix a date of hearing before passing appropriate order. In the meanwhile, the third respondent shall not interfere with or dispossess the petitioner with regard to the land covered by the said show cause notice.

With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J August 19, 2015 Note:-

Furnish copy by two days.

{B/o} LMV