IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 26831 of 2007 Between: 1 Dr.G.Suryanath Goud, S/o Jagannath Goud, 2 G.Vinod Goud, S/o Jagannath Goud, R/o 4-10, Kothapet Village, Uppal Mandal, R.R.Dist., rep.,by their GPA i) V.Rama Krishna Goud, S/o V.Swamy Goud, aged 38 yrs.Occ:Business, r/o H.No.3-4- 519/1, Narayanaguda, Hyd.ii)P.Ramesh Goud, S/o P.Ramuloo, aged 41 yrs.Occ:Business r/o H.No.2-2-165, Uppal, R.R.Dist. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. .....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 pass an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to forcibly take the possession of the petitioners land in Sy.No.590/A admeasuring ac.1.00 Gts., situated at Uppal Kalan, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, is arbitrary, illegal, unjustified, in violation of principles of the natural justice and also in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to evict/dispossess the petitioners from their said land and also direct the respondents to pay the damages and pass such other and further orders which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners : MR. C.V.BHASKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.26831 OF 2007 ORDER The petitioners herein claim to be the owners and possessors of the land to an extent of Ac.1.00 situated in Sy.No.590/A of Uppal Kalan, Uppal Mandal, Rangareddy District. It is stated that the said property is their ancestral property and by virtue of a decree for partition in O.S.No.1103 of 1979 on the file of the court of III-Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, the same was allotted to the petitioners. It is also stated that pursuant to their application the land in question was surveyed by the Survey and Land Records Inspector and a sketch map was issued and the petitioners got constructed a compound wall around the land in question. While so, the respondents herein started interfering with the possession of the petitioners without there being any justifiable reason. In the circumstances, the petitioners were constrained to file O.S.No.1030 of 1998 in the Court of the Junior Civil Judge (East and North), R.R. District at Saroornagar for perpetual injunction restraining the respondents herein from interfering with their possession. The said suit was decreed as prayed for on 8.2.1999. In spite of the said decree, the respondents on 7.12.2007 along with their subordinates and police force tried to evict the petitioners forcibly and they also demolished one side of the compound wall. Again on 12.12.2007 the respondents made similar attempt. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, this writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioners from the land in question is as arbitrary and illegal. On behalf of the respondents, the Tahsildar, Uppal Mandal, filed a counter-affidavit stating that as per the revenue records the land bearing Sy.No.589 of Uppal Khalsa Village admeasuring Ac.3.15 guntas is classified as Poramboke Sarkari. The land bearing Sy.No.590 admeasuring Ac.14.30 guntas of land classified as patta land is situated very adjacent to the Government land bearing Sy.No.589. As per Pahani for the year 1999-2000 the owner of Sy.No.590 was recorded as one Naram Bakkaiah and G. Jagannadham. The writ petitioners purchased the land in Sy.No.590 to an extent of one acre from the legal heirs of the original owner G. Jagannatham and the title claimed by the petitioners is not in dispute. However, it is alleged that under the guise of their patta land situated in Sy.No.590/A the petitioners had encroached into the adjacent Government land situated in Sy.No.589 by constructing a compound wall. Hence, the respondents demolished the said compound wall so as to protect the Government land. It is also stated that after receiving notice in the present writ petition a letter was addressed to the Assistant Director of Survey & Land Records on 10.7.2008 to demarcate the Government land bearing Sy.No.589. Accordingly, the Assistant Director of Survey & Land Records, R.R. District took up the demarcation work and prepared location sketch which revealed that the petitioners had encroached upon the Government land situated in Sy.No.589 to an extent of 14 guntas. It is further stated that Ac.1.25 guntas of Government land situated in Sy.No.589 was handed over to the Deputy Transport Commissioner, R.R. District under a cover of Panchanama on 27.2.2003 for construction of office building, driving test and vehicles seizure yard. That apart, another extent of 35 guntas was handed over to the Deputy Transport Commissioner on 7.12.2007 under a cover of Panchanama. Thus, a total extent of Ac.2.20 guntas including 14 guntas of land encroached by the petitioners was handed over to the Transport Department. Thus, it is contended that except protecting the Government land situated in Sy.No.589 the respondents never interfered with the possession of the petitioners in respect of the patta land in Sy.No.590. The petitioners filed an Affidavit-in-Reply denying the alleged encroachment into the Government land situated in Sy.No.589. It is further stated that their title and possession in respect of Ac.1.00 of land situated in Sy.No.590/A were upheld by the competent Civil Court in O.S.No.1103 of 1979 as well as O.S.No.1030 of 1998 and the land in their possession was also demarcated and boundaries were fixed by the Assistant Director of Survey & Land Records. The claim of the respondents that 35 guntas of land including 14 guntas in possession of the petitioners was handed over to the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Rangareddy on 7.12.2007 has also been denied and it is stated that the alleged handing over of the land was only symbolic and the petitioners are continuing in physical possession of the said land. It is further stated that in spite of the valid title possessed by them, to put an end to the litigation the petitioners filed an application for regularization of 14 guntas of land (1694 sq. yards) under G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.2.2008 and the same is pending. The fact that the petitioners made such an application during the pendency of this writ petition on 19.8.2008 has been admitted by the respondents in their counter-affidavit and it is stated that the said application would be placed before the District Level Committee for finalisation. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. As could be seen form the material on record, the District Collector, R.R. District, vide Memo dated 28.2.2005, issued No Objection Certificate (NOC) in favour of the petitioners for sale of the land in question and subsequently the Mandal Revenue Officer issued Possession Certificate dated 6.1.2006 confirming that the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of 3454 sq. yards in Sy.No.590/A. The said possession certificate was issued on the basis of the report of the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Uppal, dated 6.1.2006 stating that Sy.No.590/A to an extent of Ac.6.08 guntas is patta land standing in the name of G. Jagannadham and the petitioners herein are the legal heirs of the said pattadar G. Jagannadham. The decree dated 8.2.1999 in O.S.No.1030 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge (East & North), Hyderabad, R.R. District, further shows that the suit for injunction in respect of Ac.1.00 situated in Sy.No.590/A was decreed against the respondents herein. Since the said decree has become final, the respondents are bound by the same. Moreover, on 24.03.2004 a panchanama was conducted in the presence of Deputy Inspector of Uppal Khalsa, Uppal Mandal, during which while taking measurements and laying boundary stones a rough sketch map was prepared identifying the property in possession of the petitioners precisely within the specific boundaries. In the light of the material noticed above, there can be no dispute about the title and possession claimed by the petitioners. As a matter of fact, even the respondents did not dispute the same. However, the whole controversy between the parties appears to be with regard to 14 guntas. Whereas the petitioners claims that it forms part of the land claimed by them in Sy.No.590/A, around which a compound wall was also constructed, according to the respondents, the said land is situated in Sy.No.589 which is classified as Poramboke Sarkari and it is alleged that the petitioners had encroached upon the said 14 guntas. Be that as it may, admittedly the petitioners made an application on 19.8.2008 for regularization of the said 14 guntas of land under G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.02.2008 and in the counter-affidavit it is stated that the said application would be placed before the District Level Committee for finalization. Having regard to the said undisputed fact and keeping in view that an order of status quo has been in operation during the pendency of this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction that status quo with regard to the possession and enjoyment of the disputed land shall be continued till the application of the petitioners for regularization under G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.2.2008 is finalized and appropriate orders are passed in accordance with law. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI,J Dt. 17.03.2009 gbs