IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 522 of 2001 Between: 1 T.Chiranjeevulu, S/o.T.Rajaram, R/o.H.No.1-36/2/6, Road No.4, Jawahar Colony, Chandanagar, Ranga Reddy District. 2 A.Ashok, S/o.Narsimlu, R/o.H.No.1-36/2/6, Road No.4, Jawahar Colony, Chandanagar, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Sherlingampalli Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. 2 The Nodel Officer, Sherlingampalli Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Municipal Council, Rep. by its Commissioner, Sherlingampalli Municipality, 4 Sri Narsing Rao, Sherlingampalli Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. 5 Smt. K.Sunita Reddy, W/o.Prabhakar Reddy, Councillor of Ward No.20, Sherlingampalli Municipality, R/o.Jawahar Colony, Chandanagar, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein neigher to dispossess the petitioners nor to demolish the structures existing in House Nos.1-36/2/6 and H.No.1-36/2/5 situated in Sy.No.206, Road No.4, Jawahar Colony, Chandanagar, Ranga Reddy District without notice, without causing any enquiry and without following due procedure under Law by duly declaring the action of the respondents in demolishing some extent of the compound wall of the first petitioner for the purpose of widening of drain towards North side of the petitioners house without notice and without causing any enquiry at the instance of Respondent No.5 herein and further the proosed action of the respondents 3 to 5 herein to deprive the property rights the petitioners in the guise of making pucca construction of drain without notice, without causing any enquiry, without paying any compensation for the lands to be required for public purpose i.e., for construction of drain in nothing but arbitrary, illegal and violative of Art.14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the provisions of A.P. Municipalities Act and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.RAVI KIRAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The case of the petitioners is that they are absolute owners and possessors of the properties bearing H.No. 1-36/2/6 and H.No.1-36/2/5 situated in Sy.No.206, Jawahar Colony, Chandanagar, Ranga Reddy District in various extents and during the course of ‘Janma Bhoomi’ programme, on an alleged complaint said to have been made by the local residents, the compound wall on the petitioners’ property is sought to be demolished on the ground that the same is obstructing the free flow of flood water. This Court, while admitting the writ petition, granted interim direction on 20.1.2001 directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners or demolish the structures in the existing property, including the compound wall. The said interim order is subsisting. A counter affidavit is filed stating that the petitioners have no right to obstruct the free flow of flood-water with unauthorized construction of compound wall causing damage of property and risk of life to the residents of the locality. It is further averred that based on the bitter and dangerous experience during the time of floods, the local residents represented in the Janmabhoomi meeting to remove such obstruction for paving way for flow of drain water, to save the lives of people and that no political consideration can be attributed for such action. I am of the opinion that if any portion of the land is required by the respondents for public purpose, it is always open for the respondents to acquire the property in accordance with law, but without following the due process of law, the petitioners cannot be deprived of their valuate rights. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate steps to acquire the land of the petitioners, if the said land is required for public purpose. However, without following the due process of law, the petitioners shall not be dispossessed from any portion of the lands in question. No costs. -------------------------- V. ESWARAIAH, J DATE: 27.3.2008 CVM