THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26432 of 2003 DATE: 10.02.2010 Between: K.Ramakoteswara Rao …Petitioner and The Executive Engineer, PR Division, Khammam and others …Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER : SRI P.V.RAMANA COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS : GP FOR PANCHAYATRAJ THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26432 of 2003 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner sought for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in interfering with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of his property comprised in Survey No.190/129 of Ramachandrapuram Village, Aswapuram Mandal, Khammam District, while seeking to construct a road leading from Ramachandrapuram – Vaddegudem, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri P.V.Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj representing the respondents. Petitioner claims to be the owner of Acs.4.00 guntas comprised in the above-mentioned Survey Number. He has earlier, filed Writ Petition No.22254 of 2002 with the grievance that the respondents started laying of 40 feet road through his land, without acquiring it. This Court by order, dated 08.11.2002 directed maintenance of status quo. The petitioner filed the present writ petition on the allegation that in spite of the interim order passed by this Court, the respondents have laid the road resulting in loss of his ½ acre land without payment of compensation. Respondent No.1 filed a counter-affidavit, in which, while admitting that the work of laying road from Ramachandrapuram to Vaddegudem on the existing track was commenced, the answering respondent stated that in compliance with interim order, dated 22.12.2003 passed by this Court, he has instructed respondent No.2 to stop the work and that in compliance with the said direction, respondent No.2 through his letter, dated 27.12.2003 informed the answering respondent that he has instructed the Assistant Engineer (Panchayat Raj), Aswapuram, to stop the work on the land in Survey No.190/129. In the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner, he has reiterated that the work was already completed and the entire road was laid. Whether the road has been laid over the petitioner’s land or not is a disputed question of fact. Though the petitioner asserted that a road was in fact, laid, the said assertion has been denied by the respondents. It is not possible for this Court to resolve this issue, while exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The fact, however, remains that the respondents have not acquired the petitioner’s land. The petitioner is therefore, free to use the land, over which, the road was allegedly laid, and is entitled to remove the road, if any laid, and recover the expenditure from the respondents by availing appropriate remedy available to him under law. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 10th FEBRUARY, 2010. kvni