IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 5231 of 2008 Between: 1 Vijaya W/o.Srinu R/o.16-1-486/A/.1 Saidabad, Hyderabad (Patta No.186) 2 K.Sujatha W/o.Gopi R/o.16-1-486/A/1 Saidabad,Hyderabad(184) ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District Khairitabad, Hyderabad 2 The Revenue Divisonal Officer, (Ranga Reddy East Divison), Ranga REddy District 3 The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal Ranga Reddy District 4 S.Deshya Nayak S/o..Ramjya Nayak R/o.Plot No.2, Srilaxminagar colony Kammaguda village, Hayathnagar Mandal 5 Bansi Nayak S/o.Not know R/o.Nandanavanam colony Saroornagar Mandal Ranga Reddy District 6 S.Kapura S/o.Not knwon R/o.Plot No.2 Srilaxminagar colony Kammaguda village, Hayathnagar Mandal .....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 particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 to 6 as illegal, arbitrary, and against the principles of natural justice and in violation of Article 300-A of constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action on petitioners representation dated 5.12.2007 and to restore the possession of the petitioners over the patta lands granted by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings No.RDO.No.B1/2612/2003 No.C/658/2003 dated 27.10.2003 vide patta No.186 inSy.No.212/1 situated at Kammaguda village, Hayathnagar Mandal, R.R.District in favor of the 1st petitioner and patta No.184 inSy.No.212/1 situated at Kammaguda vilage, Hayath nagar Mandal, R.R.District in favour of the 2nd petitioner and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.SAI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 5231 of 2008 Order: The petitioners state that they were granted pattas in respect of the lands in question and by virtue thereof, they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. While so, it is their case that when the unofficial respondent Nos.4 to 6 forcibly occupied the lands in their possession, they made representation dated 05.12.2007, requesting the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action against the unofficial respondents and restore the possession in their favour, but so far no action thereon had been taken. The Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the official respondent Nos. 1 to 3, on instructions, submitted that the District Collector, R.R. District, in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 493/Rev/Assgn-V/Dept, dated 28.04.2006, has issued proceedings dated 28.03.2007, canceling the patta certificates prepared before 28.04.2006 but not distributed to the beneficiaries and all the patta certificates distributed, but possession of land was not given to the beneficiaries. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for official respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Though the petitioners claim that they were granted pattas in respect of the land in question, the fact remains, it is the case of the official respondent Nos. 1 to 3, that the the District Collector, R.R. District, in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 493/Rev/Assgn-V/Dept, dated 28.04.2006, has issued proceedings dated 28.03.2007, canceling the patta certificates prepared before 28.04.2006 but not distributed to the beneficiaries and all the patta certificates distributed, but possession of land was not given to the beneficiaries. Be that as it may, the petitioners by filing this writ petition, are seeking relief of injunction against unofficial respondent Nos. 4 to 6, which cannot be granted by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If the petitioners are in possession of the land in question, and if the unofficial respondent Nos. 4 to 6 are interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the same without any right whatsoever, then their remedy is to approach the competent Civil Court, for redressal of their grievances. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court for redressal of their grievances, if any. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 02.04.2008 Ksr/Nsr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}