IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.12176 of 2009 Between: K.Radhakrishna. … Petitioner And The Government of A.P., Irrigation and CAD (PW.Major.IX) Department, reptd., by its Chief Engineer, NSRS (Srisailam) Project, Hyderabad and two others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri K.Narsi Reddy. Counsel for respondents: AGP for Irrigation. This Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in seeking to evict the petitioner from Quarter No.A/118, NSRS Srisailam Project Colony, Sunnipenta, without following due process of law, as illegal Heard Sri K.Narsi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record. In his affidavit the petitioner claimed that he is executing departmental contract works at Srisailam Dam; that he is residing in Government Quarter No.A/118 at Sunnipenta for the last 10 years by paying rents as fixed by the respondent-authorities; and that respondent No.3 addressed letter dated 6-3-2009 to the Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Srisailam to evict the occupants of the Government quarters. The petitioner assailed this communication on the ground that the respondents are seeking to evict the petitioner without following the provisions of A.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1968. A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner has not filed any material in support of his plea that he is in occupation of the said Government quarter for the last 10 years. He also failed to produce the rent receipts to show that he has been paying the rents. Contrary to his plea, the petitioner’s wife made a representation on 24-3-2009 to the Chief Engineer (Projects), NSRS Srisailam Project, Hyderabad, respondent No.1 herein, wherein it is stated that she is an unemployed graduate, that she is desirous of running a training center to give training to educated and uneducated women in tailoring, embroidery, soft toys and fabric training under self-employment scheme; and that, therefore, the Chief Engineer may allot Government Quarter No.A/118 in her favour on rental basis. This letter, ex facie, falsifies the plea of the petitioner that he is in occupation of the said quarter for the last 10 years. A perusal of letter dated 6-3-2009 addressed by the Executive Engineer, Camps and Building Division, NSRS Srisailam Project, Srisailam, respondent No.3 herein, to the Station House Officer of II Town Police Station, Srisailam, shows that in pursuance of the Government policy declared, vide G.O.Ms.No.21, Irrigation & CAD (PW.Major.II) Department, dated 5-2- 2009, to allot the quarters/lands to the people of below poverty line (BPL) under their occupation free of cost, many private individuals, who do not fall in the said category, started occupying Government quarters/lands in the R.F.Colony of Srisailam Project at Sunnipenta by constructing compound walls with rubble, bricks etc., with a view to take undue advantage of the above mentioned scheme of the Government. In order to evict them from the unauthorized occupation, he requested the Station House Officer to intervene in the matter and take appropriate action to evict such illegal occupants of Government quarters/lands. Though a list of persons is said to have been enclosed to the said letter, the petitioner failed to file the said list. It is, therefore, not known whether the name of the petitioner is shown in the said list or not. Be that as it may, the petitioner failed to prove that he was permitted to occupy the quarter in question by the respondents. No iota of proof is produced by the petitioner to show that he is in occupation of the said quarter for the last ten years. Unless the petitioner satisfies this Court that his entry into the quarter in question was lawful and that he has some semblance of legal right to be in occupation of the same, he is not entitled to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court to prevent the respondents from taking possession of the said quarter, which, admittedly, belongs to them. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.15723 of 2009 is dismissed as infructuous. --------------------------------------- - C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 23-6-2009 MNR