IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 24951 of 2008 Between: 1 Tanguturi Bala Penchalaiah S/o.Tanguturi Narasaiah R/o. Ananthapuram (Village) Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District. 2 Tanguturi Peda Chanteiah S/o.Late Chinna Narasaiah R/o. Ananthapuram (Village) Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District. 3 Tanguturi Bujjaiah S/o.Late Chinna Narasaiah R/o. Ananthapuram (Village) Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District. 4 Galenki Chennaiah S/o.Late Nagaiah R/o. Ananthapuram (Village) Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District. 5 Tanguturi Aruna W/o.Late Yadagiri R/o. Ananthapuram (Village) Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District. 6 Parri Papaiah S/o.Late Rosaiah R/o. Ananthapuram (Village) Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District. 7 Tanguturi Penchalamma W/o.Late Penchalaiah R/o. Ananthapuram (Village) Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kavali, Nellore District. 2 The Tahsildar, Kaligiri Mandal, Kaligiri, Nellore 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 nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in trying to dispossess the petitioners from the land in Sy.No.106-10, extent Ac.0.24 cents; Sy.No.106-12, extent Ac.0.24 cents; Sy.No.106, extent Ac.0.24 cents; Sy.No.106, extent Ac.0.24 cents; Sy.No.106-6, extent Ac.0.24 cents; Sy.No.106, extent Ac.0.24 cents; Sy.No.106-7, extent Ac.0.24 cents; situated at Ananthapuram Village, Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District respectively is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, in violation of principles of natural justice and the procedure contemplated in B.S.O.15., and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the said land and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.CH.CKRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 24951 of 2008 22-07-2009 Oral Order: Threat of dispossession by the 2nd respondent in respect of the lands in Ananthapuram village, Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District, is the complaint in this writ petition. The petitioners claim to be original assignees or heirs of the original assignees of Government lands and to be in continuous occupation, possession and enjoyment of these lands since 1988 including through their ancestors. They allege that they continue to be lawful assignees of the lands in question as no orders of resumption or cancellation of the assignments made, were passed. Even so, without notice, opportunity or following the due process of law, the respondents, in particular the 2nd respondent is trying to dispossess them, is the grievance. Neither the State nor an Instrumentality of the State is impleaded as respondent in this writ petition. The petitioners are content to merely implead the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kavali, Nellore District and the Tahasildar, Kaligiri Mandal, Kaligiri, Nellore District as respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. These respondents are not State or an Instrumentality of the State. In any event, if the petitioners apprehend unlawful dispossession from their properties even at the hands of a person holding public office, the petitioners are seen to have an effective, alternative remedy by way of seeking injunctive or any other appropriate relief before the civil Court of competent jurisdiction apart from several other remedies. In case of a threat of imminent dispossession, the petitioners may seek dispensing with the notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, even if such a notice is warranted. In case the petitioners are dispossessed they may even obtain restitution under the provisions of Specific Relief Act. In the context of availability of equally efficacious remedies, this Court is not inclined to adjudicate upon this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to pursue appropriate alternative remedies. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 22-07-2009 Pvks