IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 10771 of 2005 Between: Yerra Satynarayana, S/o. Tata, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of A.P., rep. by its Prl., Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Govt of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Admn., Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam. 4 Vice Chairman, Visakhapatnam Urban Development- Authority, Visakhapatnam. 5 Mandal Revenue Officr, Anandapuram Mandal, Anandapuram Visakhapatnam 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 Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions, more particualrly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, setting aside the orders of the District Collector, Visakdhapatnam in his proc. Rc.No.5938/2004/E2 dt. 9.12.2004 in so far as it relates to survey No.146/2 carved out of Survey No.121 of Ramvaram Village, of an extent of Ac.1.78 cents dry of Andadapuram Mandal, visakhapatnam District and pass such other just orders in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.RAMABRAHMAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: The writ petition is filed alleging that consequent on the third respondent’s proceedings dated 09-12-2004 the respondents are interfering with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of an extent of Ac.1-78 cents in survey No. 146/2 of Ramavaram village. In G.O.Ms.No. 81, M.A. & U.D.A. Department dated 20-07- 2004, the State Government directed the several urban development authorities to identify Government and other lands in and around their development areas that have potential for undertaking comprehensive townships development and to approach the District Collectors for transfer of such lands. Thereupon, the Vishakapatnam Urban Development Authority, Vishakapatnam (for short ‘the VUDA’) proposed development of infrastructure like formation of roads, construction of C.D. works, S.W. drains etc., in the VAMBAY colony at Madhurawada as announced by the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh during the inauguration of VAMBAY colony on 25-09-2004. Energized by the announcement by the Chief Political Executive, the VUDA identified certain lands and sent up a proposal to the Government requesting/directing the third respondent to issue orders to handover advance possession of Government lands, which are free from encroachments/assignment/litigations, to the VUDA. The land assigned to the petitioner by the fifth respondent in proceedings dated 30-01-1998 is also included in survey numbers enumerated in the above proceedings of the third respondent dated 09-12-2004. Therefore, apprehending dispossession and interference, this writ petition is filed. As has become customary respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have not filed counter affidavits and have left it to the fifth respondent, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Anandapuram mandal, to do so. The fifth respondent filed a counter affidavit admitting that on verification of the records, it is seen that the petitioner was assigned land in an extent of Ac.01-78 cents in survey No. 146/2 of Ramavaram village on 30-01-1998 and that the patta is not so far cancelled. It is also admitted that the third respondent issued proceedings dated 09-12-2004 directing the Mandal Revenue Officers of several mandals to handover advance possession of the lands to the representatives of the VUDA including the lands in old survey No. 121 of Ramavaram village (corresponding to survey No. 146/2 of Ramavaram village). Having stated as above, the fifth respondent who has also filed the counter affidavit on behalf of the third respondent does not address the crucial issue whether as a consequence of the impugned order the petitioner would suffer dispossession from the lands assigned to him even during the currency of the assignment. From the averments in the counter of the fifth respondent it is clear that the counter is evasive and avoids response to the crucial issue in the writ petition. The other respondents were content to outsource the obligation of filing a counter affidavit to the fifth respondent. In this state of affairs, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue has obtained instructions from the respondents and concedes the position on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner will not be deprived of his possession and enjoyment of the property in an extent of Ac.01-78 cents in survey No. 146/2 of Ramvaram village during the subsistence of the assignment in his favour and thereafter too without following the due process of law. This undertaking given to this Court orally by the learned Government Pleader for Revenue on instructions from the respondents extricates the respondents from the predicament consequent on the silence of the respondents No.1 to 4 and the evasive counter of the fifth respondent. The statement of the learned Government Pleader is recorded and the writ petition is disposed of in terms thereof. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 23-04-2008 Pvks/*