IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19586 of 2010 BETWEEN Dasari Manikyamma. ... PETITIONER AND The District Collector/Chairman, Prakasam District. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. B. THIMOTHI Counsel for the Respondent: MR. M. GANGA RAO The Court made the following order: ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 19.05.2010 passed in Rc.No.M2/5/2010 by the District Collector/Chairman, Prakasam District Scheduled Castes Cooperative Society Limited, Ongole. 2. The respondent society introduced a land purchasing scheme to the landless poor persons belonging to Schedule Caste. In the year 1989 about Ac.20.00 cents of land was purchased by the society and the same was registered in the name of 29 individual beneficiaries, who were identified in the above said scheme. On mortgage of the said properties, the respondent society advanced grants to such beneficiaries. In the representation 26.10.2009 it is the case of the petitioner before the District Collector/Chairman of the society that petitioner along with others were also identified but as there was prohibition not to register the land of an extent less than 50 cents, there was no registration in favour of the petitioner and some others, though they were identified as beneficiaries. On the ground that the registered owners were not allowing them to cultivate the land, the petitioner made the aforesaid representation to the Chairman of the Society to take suitable action. 3. On the ground that the aforesaid representation was not considered, the petitioner approached this Court by filing WP.No.1136 of 2010 and this Court disposed of the writ petition with direction to the first respondent to consider the representation dated 26.10.2009. In compliance of the said direction issued by this Court, the present impugned order is passed. In the impugned order, it is clearly stated that there was no agreement entered by the society in favour of the petitioner and other members numbering 19 and if they have entered into any agreements with the original allottees, the same is not binding on the respondent society. Even according to the petitioner there was no agreement by the respondent society and if the petitioner has entered into any agreement with the original allottees, she cannot seek any enforcement, as such, by the Chairman of the respondent society. The petitioner also cannot claim possession on the ground that she was also inducted into possession in an extent of 50 cents of land. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any illegality in the order passed by the District Collector/Chairman dated 19.05.2010. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J August 31, 2010 DSK