IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 9478 of 2001 Between: Koorakula Gurvaiah, S/o. Kalyavala Raju, Hindu, R/o. S.C.No.6458/477, Ganganamma Pet, Near Municipal Office, Tenali. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Sub-Collector, Tenali. 2 M.R.O., Tenali. 3 The Executive Engineer, PWD, Tenali. .....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 or a direction more particularly a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents as illegal and ultra vires to the provisions of the Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India besides being violative of principles of natural justice besides directing not to interfere with the possession of the property bearing No. 6458/477, Ganganamma Pet, Near Municipal Office, Tenali. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.JOSYULA.BHASKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Writ Petition No.9478 of 2001 ORDER: The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents not to interfere with his possession over the property bearing No.6458/477 situated at Ganganammapet, near Municipal Office, Tenali. The petitioner claims to have purchased 20 sq.yards of vacant site, along with a shed thereon, situated at Municipal Office, Ganganammapet, Tenali, under an agreement of sale, dated 12.08.1993, from the original owner, Mr.M.Pardha Saradhi, for a valuable consideration of Rs.55,000/- and to have paid Rs.10,000/- as advance. He also claims to have obtained possession of the property by way of a document dated 13.07.1994, and to be in possession thereafter. He claims to be carrying on business of making hawai cheppals. The petitioner states that he has no other property and that it is only through the business carried on by him, in the property in question, he is eking out his livelihood. He also states that he had obtained a loan from PMRY for running the shop. According to the petitioner, the respondent officials came to the spot and directed him to vacate possession of the property. He states that he had shown them the documents to prove that he had purchased the property, but the officials had refused to look into the said documents. According to the petitioner, even if he is held to be an encroacher, he is entitled to be given a notice and that no such notice was given to him. While no counter affidavit is filed, learned Government Pleader for Revenue would state that no documents whatsoever have been filed in proof of the petitioner’s title over the property in question, that it was evident that the petitioner was merely an encroacher and, since the interim order granted by this Court ceased to be in force ever since 2001, the petitioner must already have been evicted. While admitting the writ petition on 15.05.2001, this Court granted stay of dispossession only for a period of eight weeks. The interim orders were not extended thereafter. It is evident that from July, 2001 there is no interim order in force conferring any protection to the petitioner to remain in possession of the property in question. Sri J.Bhaskara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, would fairly state that, while the sale deed had not been registered, an agreement of sale had been entered into. The submission that the petitioner is merely an encroacher cannot, therefore, be said to be without merit. Since it is not even known whether the petitioner continues to be in possession as on date, ends of justice would be met if the respondents were directed not to evict the petitioner, in case he has not been evicted already, except in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________ Ramesh Ranganathan, J Dt.19.03.2009 VGB