IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.3064 of 2008 Between: 1 Kum. Divi Neelima, D/o. Muralikrihna Prasad, R/o. D.No. 55-1-19, Jagannadharaju Nagar, Venkojipalem, Visakhapatnam. 2 Smt. Attaluri Santhi Chandra, W/o. Praveen, R/o. D.No. 55-1-19, Jagannadharaju Nagar, Venkojipalem, Visakhapatnam. 3 Sri Divi Satya Sai Babu, S/o. Madhusudhana Rao, R/o. D.No. 55-1-19, Jagannadharaju Nagar, Venkojipalem, Visakhapatnam. 4 Sri Divi Satya Satchandra Kiran, S/o.Murali Krishna Prasad, R/o. D.No. 55-1-19, Jagannadharaju Nagar, Venkojipalem, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Chingadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam. 4 The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Being Rep. by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in resorting to give land belonging to the petitioners in an extent of Ac.0.97 cents in Sy. No.1/1 situate at Rishikona Village,Yandada Gram Pachyat, Visakhapatnam for development to third parties without following due process of law without authority of law as illegal, arbitrary and as violative of the principles of natural justice and to direct the respondents not to interfere or give for development the petitioners land and to pass such other order or orders as are necessary in the interests of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners:SRI J.V.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.3064 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by four petitioners seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in resorting to give land belonging to them for development to third parties as illegal and arbitrary. Petitioners also seek a direction to respondents not to interfere with their possession or give away the land. The brief fact of the matter is as follows. Petitioners, who belong to one family and closely related, are allegedly absolute owners of Ac.0.97 cents in survey No.1/1 of Rishikonda Village near Visakhapatnam. They purchased different extents of land ranging from 757 square yards to 788 square yards under various registered sale deeds dated 06.10.1999. The petitioners have given details of their title and their vendors’ title. But, it is not necessary to refer to the same. When the petitioners commenced construction of compound wall, the officials of fourth respondent allegedly obstructed. Petitioners then issued notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and under Section 685 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955, to respondents and filed a suit, being O.S.No.226 of 2006, against the respondents for permanent injunction. The Court of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, granted ad interim injunction in I.A.No.235 of 2006 on 15.02.2006. In spite of the same, respondents are trying to interfere with the land. The petitioners, therefore, filed a contempt petition before the civil Court, which is pending. Yet again, they filed the present writ petition alleging that respondents are taking steps to give the land for development. After hearing learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General-AA), this Court is of considered opinion that the writ petition is not maintainable. It is well settled that a person, who has approached civil Court for redressal, again cannot approach High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (See Carl Still G.M.B.H. v State of Bihar[1]). As rightly pointed out by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the petitioners have filed the suit against the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the District Collector for permanent injunction. The civil Court already passed order of status quo in respect of the property claimed by the petitioners. If any further steps are taken by the respondents contrary to the status quo order, petitioners can file another application before the civil Court for appropriate relief. The Writ Petition is misconceived, and the same is dismissed accordingly. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 20.11.2008 vs To 1 The Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Chingadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam. 4 The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam. 5 2CCs to G.P for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 7 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} [1] AIR 1961 SC 1615