HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25935 of 2010 Date 20.10.2010 Between: P.Venkatratnam. ..... PETITIONER AND The District Collector, Nalgonda District and others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri V.Raghu Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue Counsel for Respondent No.4 :Mrs.Shanti Neelam (SC for Municipality) HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25935 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in demarcating the land in possession of the petitioner for the purpose of construction of community hall and slaughterhouse as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri V.Raghu, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondent No.4-Municipality. The petitioner averred that he has purchased an extent of Ac.0.15 guntas in Sy.No.38 of Ramnagar, Miryalguda, Nalgonda District under registered sale deed bearing No.1854/1989 from one K.Adivamma W/o. Gopaiah. The petitioner is stated to have raised a hut and been residing therein. It is further averred that in the month of June, 2010, the respondents came to the said property and asked the petitioner to vacate the same by claiming that they are proposing to construct community hall and slaughterhouse. The petitioner allegedly informed the said respondents that he has purchased the same for valuable consideration and requested them to refrain from proceeding further. As respondent Nos.2 and 3 are stated to have not acceded to the petitioner’s request, the latter submitted representation dated 28.06.2010 to respondent Nos.1 to 3. The petitioner claimed to have made a further representation on 21.09.2010 to respondent No.4. As the respondents are allegedly interfering with the petitioner’s possession, the present Writ Petition is filed for the above noted relief. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submitted that the property in question was assigned as house sites on 08.03.2004, that as the beneficiaries have failed to construct the houses and violated the terms of assignment, notices were issued on 12.10.2010 and that as no explanations have been submitted by the beneficiaries till now, no further action has been taken so far. In the light of the above facts, I am of the opinion that respondent Nos.1 to 3 shall consider the representations of the petitioner with reference to his right to be in possession of the property in question. Since notices are stated to have been issued to the beneficiaries, the competent authority, among respondent Nos.1 to 3, shall finalise the proceedings by giving an opportunity to the beneficiaries as well as the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. If the petitioner is in possession of the property in question, the respondents shall not interfere with the same till an appropriate decision is taken. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the main petition, WPMP.No.33120 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:20.10.2010 usd