IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 24846 of 2008 Between: K. Ramachandraiah S/o. K. Munirathnam R/o. Govindapalyam Village, Puttur Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 2 The Tahsildar, Puttur Mandal, Puttur, Chittoor District 3 The Tahsildar, Narayanavanam Mandal, Narayanavanam, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, particularly 2nd respondent in theatening to dispossess the petitioner from the assigned lands admeasuring Acs.3.99 cts. in Sy.Nos.403/3, 403/4 and 4 0 4 /5 situatd in Kalyanapuram Village Accounts, Narayanavanam Mandal, Chittoor District, as arbitrary, discriminatory, violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner of the said lands assigned to him by the 3rd respondent vide DKT Pattas No.36/4/95 and 37/4/95, both dt. 15.6.1986 and with all other consequential benefis and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.C.VANI REDDY The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 24846 of 2008 28-04-2009 Oral Order: Rule nisi. Call for records. Notice returnable in four weeks. The writ petition is filed alleging that the 2nd respondent is trying to dispossess the petitioner from land in an extent of Ac.03-99 cents in survey Nos. 403/3, 403/4 and 404/5 of Kalyanapuram village, Narayanavanam Mandal, Chittoor District. The land was assigned to the petitioner and he claims to be in possession and enjoyment of the same for over thirty (30) years. The 3rd respondent has also issued a pattadar passbook and title deeds duly counter signed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, on 14-08-1997, copies of which are filed in the writ petition. The petitioner alleges that on 01-11-2008 the 2nd respondent along with his staff came on to his land and started surveying the same when the petitioner was not in the village. Thereafter the petitioner met the 2nd respondent and enquired as to why his lands were being surveyed. The 2nd respondent is stated to have informed the petitioner that the lands assigned to him are identified for allotment in favour of third parties. Despite the petitioner showing his title deeds, DKT Pattas and other documents, the 2nd respondent is threatening to allot the lands to the third parties and that is the reason why the writ petition is filed. Notice before admission was ordered on 14-11-2008, but there is no response by way of a counter affidavit from the respondents. When the learned Government Pleader for Revenue was directed to obtain instructions from the respondents and the matter is taken up today, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignment) states that on the basis of a letter written to him by the 2nd respondent that the respondents admit the assignment of the schedule lands to the petitioner under a DKT Patta dated 15-06-1986. The petitioner’s possession is also admitted as also that he developed a mango garden in the lands. The letter also admits that the name of the petitioner is entered in the 10(1) Register under Patta No. 1413 and also in the No.3 Adangal. According to the learned Government Pleader, and this is also verified from the letter of the 2nd respondent a copy of which is placed before this Court for its perusal, there are no proposals to resume the land after cancellation of the patta. As there is a total denial of any interference or attempt to allot the land of the petitioner to the others, no further proceedings are warranted in this writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of recording the submissions made on behalf of the respondents by the learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments). No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 28-04-2009 Pvks