IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14363 of 2005 Between: Smt. K. Vallikumari W/o Venkatachalapathi R/o D. No. 10-15-45/A, Kotakommala Layout, Tirupathi Town, Chittoor District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Chittoor District 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati, Chittoor District 4 The Chairman/Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Society Ltd., Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.P.CHANDRAMOULI Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR ASSIGNMENT The Court made the following : ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is concerned with an extent of Ac.4.56 cents of land in Survey No.491/2 of Avilala Village accounts, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District. The petitioner feeling aggrieved by the action of the respondents in seeking to dispossess her from the said property, filed the present writ petition. Her claim as reflected in her pleadings in this writ petition is that the ancestors of one Thondamanati Raghava Reddy of Tirupati Town were the owners of the said property; that one T.Nandagopal, resident of Chandragiri purchased the said property under registered sale deed, dated 21.05.1970 and that the said person thereafter sold the same to one Smt. P.Seshamma under registered sale deed, dated 06.04.1981. The petitioner’s further case is that mutation was made in favour of the said Seshamma by the Mandal Revenue Officer vide his proceedings, dated 10.02.1988 and pattadar passbooks were also issued in her favour and that the said Seshamma sold away the said land to the petitioner for a valuable consideration of Rs.98,400/- by way of registered sale deed, dated 27.05.1993. On coming to know from the newspaper reports that respondent Nos.1 to 3 handed over possession of the said property to respondent No.4 for construction of houses under ‘Rajiv Gruhakalpa’, the petitioner approached the said respondents and as she did not receive any reply from them, she filed the present writ petition. In the counter-affidavit filed along with the application for vacating stay, respondent No.4 stated that the property in question was classified as Assessed, Waste and Dry and was carved out from a larger extent of 215.64 acres classified as River Poramboke; that an extent of Ac.4.56 cents was assigned to Sri T.Raghava Reddy vide DKT No.110/4/70, dated 15.11.1970 in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.1142, Revenue, dated 18.06.1954; that the said property was sold under registered sale deed, dated 09.04.1981 by the assignee to Smt. Putta Seshamma in violation of the conditions of assignment and that after following the prescribed procedure, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupati (Rural) vide his proceedings Roc.C/134/86, dated 05.02.1986 resumed the land to the Government and possession was taken under a cover of panchanama, dated 28.02.1986. It is claimed that from the date of resumption of the land, the Government is in possession of the said property. It is further pleaded that the alleged sale transaction made by Smt. P.Seshamma in favour of the petitioner through registered sale deed, dated 27.05.1993, which is not in the knowledge of the respondents, even if true, has no legal validity. It is further pleaded that the patta transfer proceedings, dated 10.02.1988 and pattadar passbook issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer standing in the name of Seshamma, were concocted and they have no validity in the eye of law. It is also stated that the property is being utilized for the purpose of construction of houses for poor under ‘Rajiv Gruhakalpa’ and possession of the same was handed over to the District Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Housing Corporation, Chittoor in pursuance of order, dated 22.06.2005 passed by the District Collector, Chittoor. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupati (Rural) filed an additional affidavit wherein it is stated that various registered sale transactions were entered into by the petitioner with third parties and that her statement in the writ petition that she is in possession of the property, concealing the fact that she unauthorisedly sold the properties to as many as 15 persons, is wholly misleading. It is asserted that the land was handed over to the District Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Housing Corporation, Chittoor on 23.06.2005 under a cover of panchanama and the same is in possession of the said authority. Having regard to the averments contained in the counter-affidavit, which clearly reveal that the petitioner purchased the property much after the same was resumed to the Government, she does not derive any title whatsoever to the same. In this view of the matter, the petitioner failed to make out any case of infringement of her legal rights for this Court to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Even if the petitioner asserts her legal and valid title to the property, in view of the stand taken by the respondents, a serious dispute over the petitioner’s title arises which cannot be adjudicated by this Court while exercising writ jurisdiction. If the petitioner seeks to assert her title over the property, appropriate remedy for her is to approach the civil Court of competent jurisdiction and establish her case by adducing necessary evidence before it. I am, therefore, of the considered view that the present writ petition is wholly misconceived and the same is dismissed subject to the above observations. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, interim order, dated 04.07.2005 is vacated, WPMP.No.18246 of 2005 is dismissed and WVMP.No.2393 of 2005 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NARAGJUNA REDDY, J 20th June, 2008. kvni