HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 1183 of 2003 DATED: 17.02.2011 Between: Chakali Anjamma .. Petitioner And 1. The District Collector 2. District Panchayat Officer 3. Sarpanch, Pudur Village & Mandal 4. P. Venkata Reddy .. Respondents O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to conduct an enquiry into the matter and declare the inaction of the respondents in protecting the land belonging to Gram Panchayat, Pudur, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to stop any construction that may be made by the third party including the 4th respondent in the land. The petitioner is a member of Gram Panchayat, Pudur. According to her, the 3rd respondent-Sarpanch is allowing the 4th respondent to raise structures in the Gramakantam land adjacent to Sy.No.20/55 of Pudur village. The petitioner states that Sy.No.20/55 is a Gramakantam land and neither the 3rd respondent is authorized to dispose of the land in question nor the 4th respondent is entitled to get the same allotted in his favour. According to the petitioner, neither any allotment of land is made nor any written permission is obtained from the higher authorities. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent simply permitted the 4th respondent to raise structures, as such, the 4th respondent is intending to raise structures in the land in question. After admitting the Writ Petition, this Court, on 08.11.2004, directed both the parties to maintain status quo obtaining as on that day. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue has contended that the question of allowing a third party from utilizing or occupying the gram-kantam land does not arise. In fact, in this regard, the 2nd respondent-District Panchayat Officer addressed a letter dated 09.12.2002 to Divisional Panchayat Officer to conduct an enquiry into the matter and take appropriate steps. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent has contended that the land in question is the patta land belonging to the 4th respondent, and therefore, the petitioner has no right whatsoever to file this writ petition and harass him for nothing. He has further contended that there is some enmity between the petitioner and the 4th respondent, as such, the petitioner has taken advantage of the situation and approached the respondents for protection of the land in question. According to the petitioner, the authorities have neither conducted any enquiry into the matter nor taken any steps so far. Unless and until an enquiry is conducted as per law, the 4th respondent cannot be deterred from utilizing Gramkantam land for his personal purpose. Be that as it may, since the 2nd respondent - District Panchayat Officer has already directed the Divisional Panchayat Officer, Vikarabad, vide his letter dated 09.12.2002 for conducting an enquiry and submitting a report, and the same is pending consideration, this Court is not inclined to go into all the details, but deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Vikarabad is directed to conduct a detailed enquiry into the matter after putting all the parties on notice and submit a report to the 2nd respondent- District Panchayat Officer, for his consideration, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and on receipt of such report, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and take appropriate action in accordance with law”. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________ C.V. RAMULU, J 17th February, 2011 bcj