THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1404 of 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioners seek a mandamus declaring the action of respondents 2 and 3 in interfering with their possession over the land admeasuring Acs.10.00 cents covered by Survey No.1/1 of Damavaram Village, Dagadarthi Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioners that Damavaram Village was an inam village and they are in occupation of the aforesaid piece of land inherited from their ancestors. It is stated that the original inamdars were allotted the land admeasuring Acs.2000.00 cents as ‘Dakshinapu Beedu’ on condition of paying specified amount towards lease. Subsequently, suits were filed by the inamdars and it was settled allowing the inamdars to be in possession of the land to an extent of Acs.700.00 cents. It is their case that they being ryots were in possession of the land to an extent of Acs.10.00 cents, as it was leased out to them. It is stated that when the lease was cancelled, they approached this Court and filed W.P.No.26022 of 2008, which is pending consideration. So far as this writ petition is concerned, the petitioners have not questioned any order but merely sought for a declaration to the effect that interference by respondents 2 and 3 with their possession over the aforesaid land is illegal and arbitrary. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by respondent No.3. In the counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations levelled by the petitioners, it is stated that Damavaram Village was notified under the provisions of the Estate Abolition Act, 1948 and taken over by the Government on 01.10.1951 and the Government became the owner of such village. It is further stated that inamdars or leaseholders did not cultivate the land. The respondents have denied the possession of the petitioners over the land to an extent of Acs.10.00 cents covered by Survey No.1/1 of Damavaram Village. It is further stated that the petitioners trespassed into the land forcibly and raised black gram crop with a view to create a right over the land and to show themselves as legal heirs to the original lessees. It is also stated that the petitioners have entered into the land for the first time after obtaining status quo orders from this Court in WPMP.No.34049 of 2008 in W.P.No.26022 of 2008 on 28.11.2008. With regard to the land in question, the rights, if any claimed by the petitioners thereon, is a matter to be adjudicated in W.P.No.26022 of 2008, which is pending. But, on the premise that they are in possession of the land in question and there is interference by respondents 2 and 3, this writ petition is filed. In the counter-affidavit, the respondents have categorically denied with regard to the possession of the petitioners over the land in question and stated that the petitioners entered into the land by virtue of the status quo orders obtained from this Court. In view of serious factual disputes with regard to the possession over the land in question, it is not possible for this Court to record any finding whether the petitioners are in possession of the land in question or not. As the petitioners are not in possession as on the date of passing of the status quo orders by this Court, they cannot enter into the land under the guise of such orders. In view of the fact that the status quo orders are still holding the field, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents clarifying that if the petitioners are not in possession over the land in question as on the date of passing of the status quo orders in W.P.No.26022 of 2008, they are not entitled to cultivate the land. If they happened to be in possession as on the said date, they shall be allowed to cultivate the same subject to the outcome of the final orders to be passed in W.P.No.26022 of 2008. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 15th JULY, 2010. kvni