GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

ABSTRACT

Tribal Welfare - Revision Petition filed by Sri Vemula Bhaskara Rao and others U/s.6 of A.P.Scheduled Area Transfer Regulation 1959 against the orders of Agent to Government, Khammam in CMA No.54/97 dated 11-5-2000 - Dismissed     - Orders - Issued.

SOCIAL WELFARE (LTR.2) DEPARTMENT

G.O.Ms.No.108                                                                             Dated: 30-11-2000

Read the following:

1. Revision Petition filed by Sri K.Vinaya Kumar, Counsel for thepetitioner dated 19-5-2000.

2. Govt.Memo.No.7573/LTR.2/2000-1,dt.20-5-2000

3. From the Collector,Khammam Lr.No.F1/CMA-54/97, dt.25-10-2000

***

ORDER :

In the reference first read above Sri Vemula Bhaskara Rao andothers, Erragunta (V), Chandrugonda (M), Khammam

district have filed Revision Petition through their Counselagainst the orders of the Agent to Government, Khammam in        

CMA No.54/97 dated 11-5-2000.

2. In the reference second read above Government have issued stayon the operation of the orders of the Agent to

Government, Khammam in CMA No.54/97 dated 11-5-2000.

3. In the reference third read above the Collector,Khammam hasfurnished parawise remarks and connected case records    

on the said Revision Petition.

4. Government have issued notices to the Counsel for thepetitioners under section 6 of A.P.Scheduled Area Transfer

Regulation, 1959 vide reference 4th read above to hear theRevision Petition. The case has come up for hearing on

21-11-2000. Heard the arguements of the Advocates representingpetitioners and also the respondents in this case. The

Advocate for appellant has based his arguements on resjudicate,time limitation, authenticity of ROR records issued by

Government which have also been enumerated in the RevisionPetition. The Agent to Government has gone in detail in his

orders rebutting the above arguements presented.

5. Government have examined the order of Agent to Governmentwhich is fully convincing and totally rebuts the arguement of

the Advocate for the appellant. The Advocate for the appellanthas produced no further document and when asked to produce

the registered sale deed of 1961 by virtue of wh ich theappellant in this revision petition is supposed to be the owner of the

land, he has failed to produce such document. Moreover theCounsel for the petitioners failed to produce the document in

which competent authority is supposed to have given permissionto purchase the petition schedule tribal land in Agency Area.

It is evident that there is no permission from the competentauthority. Hence the Government find no reason to interfere with

the orders of the Agent to Government. Therefore the revisionpetition is dismissed and the order passed by the Agent to

Government, Khammam is upheld with a direction to the Agent toGovernment to immediately take possession of the suit

land and handover the same to the respondent in the presentrevision petition ie.e. to Sri Sadium Potharaju. The stay orders

issued in Government Memo.second read above are vacated. TheCounsel for the petitioners is requested to inorm his clients

accordingly.

6. The Collector,Khammam district is requested to take necessaryfurther action in the matter.

(BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOROF ANDHRA PRADESH)

C.R.BISWAL

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

To

Sri K.Vinaya Kumar,Advocate

1-3-183/40/68/C/2,2nd Park, Gandhinagar

Hyderabad (By RPAD).

The Collector,Khammam.

(The following case records are returned herewith.)

1. Case No.1106/97 CHG.

2. CMA No.54/97 dt.11-5-2000.

The Special Deputy Collector(Tribal Welfare)

Paloncha, Khammam District.

Sri Sadium Potha Raju, Shantinagaram,

H/o.Peddireddigudem, Khammam District.

SF/SCs

//FORWARDED BY ORDER//

SECTION OFFICER.