The sixth respondent granted vatious Patras of his lands to his wife, to the appellant and others in November, 1944. After the coming into force of the Andh'ra Pradesh (And hr a Area) Estates Communal, Forest and Private Lands (Prohibition df Alienation) · Act, 1947, section 4(1) of which decla~ed alienation of Communal or Forest Lands after October, 1939, to be ~oid, a petition was filed in the District Court by two ry<>ts for a declaration that the alienations in the present case were void and did not confer any rjghts on the alienees. The District Judge allowed the petiti<>n holding that the lands in question were forest lands and the alienations were void. Revision petitions filed b<-for• a Single Judge of the High Court were dismissed but in a Lettei-s ~at1 '.nt Appeal it was field that the petitioners as ryots bad no right to rr.aLt1tain the petition, and a reasonable opportunity had to be given to the State to get itself transposed as the petitioner. The State Government was then transposed as the petitioner but thereafter the District Judge held that the petition was not maintainable by reason elf. the repeal of the Act of 194 7 upon the passing of a sub<equent Act namely the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948. However, a revision petition against this order was allowed by the High Court which remitted the matter to the District Judge. By a judgment in November, 1960 the District Judge allowed the petition nogahving the respondent's contention but held that the lands were forest lands and their transfers were void. Further revision petitions filed by the appellant and others were dismissed by the High Court.
