IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 12966 of 2006 Between: Bala Veeraiah S/o. Venkaiah R/o. Moddulagudem (V), Dammapet (M), Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Mandal Revenue Officer Cum Mandal Executive Magistrate, Dammapet Mandal, Khammam District. 2 Station House Officer, Dammapet Police Station, Dammapet , Khammam District. 3 D. Seshagiri Rao S/o. Ramaiah Khammam District. 4 Smt. Dodda Venkamma W/o. Ramaiah Khammam 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 anture of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in prohibiting him from entering into his land and cultivation in an extent of Ac. 3.00 gts of land in Sy.no. 103 of Naidupet Village, Dammapet Mandal, Without furnishing him copy of such order and not paying him the sale proceeds of harvested crop is illegal, irregular, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure and offends articles 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to obstruct his possession and cultivation of said land while paying the sale proceeds of harvested crop and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SITA RAM CHAPARLA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No.12966 of 2006 23-04-2009 Oral Order: Though the writ petition targets the conduct of the 1st respondent prohibiting the petitioner from entering upon the agricultural property in an extent of Ac.03-00 guntas in survey No. 103 of Naidupet village, Dammapet Mandal, Khammam District, under a purported order issued under Section 145 Cr.P.C., the substantive grievance of the petitioner is however that under the guise of the order under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. his possession is being disturbed. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit, which at paragraph No.4 states that subsequent to the initiation of proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C., there is no disturbance over the land; the land was demarcated; the petitioner’s possession is not disturbed and he continues in possession and enjoyment of his property. The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Seetharam Chaparla is satisfied with this assertion in the counter affidavit. In the circumstances, no further orders need be passed. The writ petition is disposed of recording the above averments of the 1st respondent. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 23-04-2009 Pvks