IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 215 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 22/01/2007 in WP NO : 614 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Smt.Kolati Karuna, w/o K.V.S.Rama Murthy, r/o A1/46, Mayuri Apartments, Mayuri Marg, Begumpet, Hyderabad-16. 2 V.Lalithamani, w/o V.Bhujanga Rao, r/o Type-IV, Quarter No.11, NSTL Campus, Buchirajupalem, Visakhapatnam-530 027. 3 Smt.B.Varalakshmi, w/o Venkata Ramana, r/o D.No.58-30-60, NAD, New Road, Visakhapatnam. 4 K.Suryanarayana Murthy, s/o late Appala Narasimha Murthy, r/o D.No.57-27-44/1, Sri Ramnagar, old ITI, Visakhapatnam-1. 5 Kasarapu Atychutha Rao, s/o Satti Rajulu, r/o D.No.24-14--43/1, Chinnamwari Street, Visakhapatnam-1. 6 Kadiri Rama Rao, s/o K.Police, r/o D.No.24-27-20, Kotha Veedhi, Visakhapatnam-1. 7 Kadiri Rama Rao, s/o K.Police, r/o D.No.24-27-20, Kotha Veedhi, Visakhapatnam-1. ..... APPELLANT(S) AND 1 The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam. 2 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam. 3 the Mandal Revenue Officer, Chinagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam Rural, Visakhapatnam. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.P.SRI RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per Anil R. Dave, CJ) The appellants are the petitioners who filed W.P.No. 614 of 2007 praying that they should not be dispossessed from their Plots bearing Plot Nos. 146, 147, 136, 137, 248, 249 and 242 which are in Sy.Nos. 7/1, 7/2, 8/2, 8/6, 8/8 and 10/3 of Darapalem of Mudasalalova Village, Chinnagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam, without following due process of law. The said petition had been dismissed by an order dated 22-1-2007. Being aggrieved by the order of rejection, this appeal has been filed. In pursuance of the instructions, learned Government Pleader has appeared and has submitted that those who are in occupation of the aforestated plots are not going to be evicted by the Government- authorities. It has been submitted by him that the land bearing Sy.No.9/1 of the aforestated Village belongs to the Government and the said land has been granted to the Central Reserve Police Force. It has been further submitted that except Sy.No.9/1, no other land has been given to the Central Reserve Police Force by the respondent-Government. In view of the above facts, in our opinion, the apprehension of the appellant is not well founded, as they are not going to be dispossessed from the aforestated plots. In our opinion, the learned Single Judge has rightly rejected the petition. The appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs. ______________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 23rd July, 2008. _________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J GRR