IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH EIGTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24312 of 2008 Between: Thirumalasetty Vemaiah, S/o.Sri Venkata Swamy, aged 55 years, Sarpanch, Garapadu Village, Vatticherukur Mandal, Guntur District … Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its District Collector, Guntur, and others … Respondents Order: Though miscellaneous petitions are listed for hearing; at the request of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition itself is disposed of. The petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to cancel the allotment in Sy.Nos.71/C, 58/2B and 58/2C of Garapadu village, Vatticherukuru Mandal, Guntur District and trying to allot the land in Sy.Nos.32 and 33 of Garapadu Village, Vatticherukuru Mandal, Guntur District for the purpose of house-sites under Indiramma Scheme, a housing Scheme, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner claims to be the Sarpanch of Garapadu village having been elected in the year 2006. For the purpose of providing house-sites under the aforesaid housing scheme, an extent of Ac.2.53 cents covered by Sy.Nos.58/2B, 58/2C and 71/1C of the village was acquired by the respondents. Subsequently, there was a representation from the encroachers who have encroached Donka Poramboke in Sy.Nos.32 and 33 of the village stating that they have been residing therein form the last more than 50 years by raising structures and they made a request in the said representation that houses should be constructed for them under the said scheme in the very same land. In view of the said representation, an extent of Ac.0.49 cents in Sy.No.33 of Garapadu village, Vatticherukuru Mandal, which was a Donka Poramboke was converted into village site by proceedings of the Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur, in D.Dis.No:173/2008/E3, dated 18-10-2008 and was published in Gazette No.135 dated 14-10-2008 as contemplated under Section 246 sub-section 3 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though originally , an extent of Ac.2.53 cents covered by Sy.Nos.58/2B, 58/2C and 71/1C of the village was acquired, respondents are canceling the same and bent upon to acquire, construct and allot house-sites in the Donka Poramboke, by converting the same into village site. Counter-Affidavit is filed by the second Tahsildar, Vatticherukuru Mandal, Guntur District. While denying various allegations made by the petitioner; in the counter-affidavit, it is stated that an extent of Ac.2.53 cents in Sy.No.58/2B, 58/2C and 71/1C of Garapadu village was acquired for provision of house-sites under Indiramma Scheme and 64 plots were laid in the land acquired. It is stated that 10 encroachers out of the total encroachers numbering 34, who have encroached Donka Poramboke in Sy.No.33, were not willing to vacate the encroachments and the remaining encroachers have also applied for grant of house-sites under the scheme. It is further stated that the said persons have been residing there for the last 50 to 80 years from their forefathers’ time and the Gram Panchayat, Garapadu also recognized their encroachments, issued assessment numbers and collected house tax from them. In the counter-affidavit, the allegation of the petitioner, that the allotment in Sy.Nos.58/2B and 58/2C is going to be cancelled, is denied. Even with regard to Donka Poramboke, particulars are given. In this case, it is to be noticed that though the extent of Ac.0.49 cents in Sy.Nos.32 and 33 of Garapadu village, is a Donka Poramboke, but, in view of the request made by the encroachers of the said land, the same was converted into village site by proceedings of the Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur, in D.Dis.No:173/2008/E3, dated 18-10-2008, so as to allot house-sites under the scheme. Though it is the allegation of the petitioner that respondents are trying to cancel the allotment in Sy.Nos.58/2B, 58/2C and 71/1C, specific averment has been made in the counter- affidavit that the said allotment would not be cancelled. Therefore, I am of the view that the petitioner has approached this court with a mere apprehension that the allotment of house-sites in Sy.Nos.58/2B, 58/2C and 71/1C will be cancelled. Hence, no relief, as sought, can be granted. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) October 28, 2010 MRR