Judgment : 1. The petitioners have questioned the inaction of respondent No.4 in issuing pattadar passbooks and title deeds in their favour in respect of Ac.18.74 cents of land in Survey Nos.380/F, 382/C3, 383/E and 383/B1 of Chengiskhanpet, H/o Kondaveedu Village, Edlapadu Mandal, Guntur District (for short ‘the subject lands’). 2. The petitioners pleaded that they have jointly purchased the subject lands from Etukuru Ratna Kumar, Syamala Prasuna and Kanneganti Venkateswarlu for valuable consideration through four registered sale deeds, dated 04.08.2011. The petitioners’ vendors have purchased the subject lands from Narasetti Prameela Devi, W/o Vinayaka Rao, Narasetti Suresh Chandra, S/o Vinayaka Rao and Tam Tam Sailaja Rani, W/o Sankara Rao for valuable consideration through four registered sale deeds, dated 17.09.2010. The petitioners further pleaded that when the vendors of the petitioners’ vendors failed to execute the sale deed, Narasetti Prameela Devi and two others have filed O.S.No.282 of 1990 in the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet for specific performance and the said suit was decreed on 01.11.2001 and that the decree was executed in E.P.No.28 of 2002 by way of execution of sale deed, dated 02.08.2006. The petitioners further pleaded that the Mandal Revenue Officer, Edlapadu and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in favour of the said persons; that when the then Mandal Revenue Officer issued a show cause notice, dated 02.03.2007, under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers), 1977 (for short ‘Act 9 of 1977’), the same was questioned by the petitioners by filing Writ Petition No.18270 of 2008; that the said Writ Petition was allowed by this Court by order, dated 29.08.2008, by setting aside the show cause notice; and that therefore, respondent No.4 has passed an order withdrawing the show cause notice and giving liberty to the owners of the property to deal with the same. 3. The petitioners further averred that they submitted an application in Form-I to respondent No.4 on 06.06.2012 under the provisions of Act 9 of 1977 for issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds and that respondent No.4, in turn, forwarded the petitioners’ application to respondent No.2 on 07.12.2012 with remarks and so far, no decision has been taken by the said respondent. 4. On 19.08.2013, this Court has adjourned the case at the request of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Andhra area) for instructions. 4. On 19.08.2013, this Court has adjourned the case at the request of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Andhra area) for instructions. Today, at the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader stated that the petitioners’ application is pending and that the same is under consideration. He has, however, stated that according to his instructions, the lands are Government lands and that, therefore, the petitioners may not be entitled to issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds in their favour. 5. I have carefully read the order, dated 29.08.2012, passed in Writ Petition No.18270 of 2008 filed by Narisetti Prameela Devi and two others, who are the vendors of the petitioners’ vendors. The facts mentioned in the said order would reveal that the land originally belonged to the Government and the same was classified as “Assessed Waste” and an assignment was granted to four persons by names Dharnasi Ramulu, Perikalla Hanumaiah, Vipparla Ramaiah and Davala Peraiah of Kondaveedu Village, prior to 1942; that after issuance of notices under Act 9 of 1977, petitioner No.1 in the said Writ Petition submitted a representation to respondent No.4 by taking the plea that the provisions of the said Act do not apply; and that pursuant to the said representation, respondent No.4 has submitted a report to respondent No.3 on 09.04.2007, wherein he has categorically stated that the assignment was granted prior to 1942. After discussing the facts of the case, this Court has set aside the said show cause notice by holding that the provisions of Act 9 of 1977 has no application to the subject lands. 6. Section 2(1) of Act 9 of 1977 defined “assigned land” as lands assigned by the Government to the landless poor persons under the rules for the time being in force, subject to the condition of non-alienation and includes lands allotted or transferred to landless poor persons under the relevant law for the time being in force relating to land ceilings. 7. In a catena of judgments, this Court has taken judicial notice of the fact that for the first time in the Andhra Area, the condition of non-alienation was introduced by way of G.O.Ms.No.1142, dated 18.06.1954. (See P.V. Rajendra Kumar Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh ( 2011(3) ALD 571 ), K.M. Kamallula Basha and others Vs. District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor and others ( 2009(3) ALD 385 ). (See P.V. Rajendra Kumar Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh ( 2011(3) ALD 571 ), K.M. Kamallula Basha and others Vs. District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor and others ( 2009(3) ALD 385 ). The A.P. State Electricity Board Employees Union, Madanapalli Division, Madanapalli Vs. The Joint Collector, Chittoor (W.P.No.19258 of 1998, dated 14.09.2007) and D. Parthasaradhi Sarma Vs. Government of A.P., Revenue (Assn.II) Department (W.P.No.27217 of 2003, dated 15.04.2008). Learned Assistant Government Pleader has not disputed this position. He has also not stated that the judgment in Writ Petition No.18270 of 2008 was questioned by the respondents in appeal. As clearly held by this Court in the above-mentioned judgment in W.P.No.18270 of 2008, if the patta was granted prior to 1942 itself, it has to be necessarily held that the assignment did not contain a clause of non-alienation. The order in the said Writ Petition binds the respondents. 8. In the face of these undisputed facts and the judgment, dated 29.08.2012, of this Court in Writ Petition No.18270 of 2008, the respondents cannot plead with any justification that the subject lands are Government lands. 9. The petitioners have stepped into the shoes of their vendors in whose favour the pattadar passbooks and title deeds were issued. Therefore, the petitioners are also legitimately entitled to issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds in their favour. 10. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed. A Mandamus shall issue to respondent No.4 to issue pattadar passbooks and title deeds to the petitioners within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. As a sequel to the disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.29758 of 2013 is disposed of as infructuous.