THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.20985 of 2008 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the notice dated 31.05.2008 issued to him by the 1st respondent- Panchayat Secretary, Pothavaram Gram Panchayat, Nallajerla Mandal of West Godavari District, wherein it is alleged that the petitioner has constructed a thatched house in the land belonging to Pothavaram Gram Panchayat and has been living therein, that his name was recommended in the survey conducted for allotment of a house site under Indiramma Housing Scheme Phase-III, but in the meanwhile he was trying to construct a pucca house in place of thatched house constructed by him in the land belonging to the Gram Panchayat and therefore he was directed not to make any such constructions in the said land. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondents are trying to evict him from the said land, without following the due process of law and without providing alternative house site as was provided to his neighbours under Indiramma Housing Scheme. Though the 1st respondent filed a counter-affidavit on 25.02.2009, since it was not clear as to whether the petitioner is entitled for allotment of a house under Indiramma Pathakam and it is stated that the Tahsildar is conducting an enquiry into the eligibility of the petitioner, this Court, on 02.07.2009, directed the 1st respondent to file a better counter-affidavit. Accordingly, the 1st respondent filed an additional counter-affidavit stating that, with a view to remove the encroachments made into the Grampanchayat land, all the names of the encroachers including the name of the wife of the petitioner were recommended for grant of house site pattas under Indiramma Phase- III, but in view of the complaints received from some of the villagers not to grant house site patta to the wife of the petitioner as she is not the resident of Pothavaram Village, the Tahsildar, Nallajerla Mandal, made an enquiry and found that the petitioner and his family members are residents of Kapavaram Village of Kovvur Mandal and a report was also submitted by the Tahsildar, Kovvur Mandal, that the petitioner is having a ration card in Kapavaram Village and the names of the petitioner and his family members found place in the voters’ list of Kapavaram Village. Therefore, the petitioner’s wife was not granted patta by the Tahsildar, Nallajerla. It is further stated that since the petitioner was making attempts to construct a pucca house in the encroached land by raising cement pillars, a notice was given to him not to make any pucca constructions in the encroached land. It is also sated that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of house site at Pothavaram Village in view of the fact that he is a permanent resident of Kapavaram Village of Kovvuru Mandal, and is having a residential house there, and that he has no right whatsoever over the land belonging to the Pothavaram Grampanchayat. Respondents 2 and 3 also filed counter-affidavit corroborating the averments in the counter-affidavit of respondent No.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. M. Prabhakar Rao, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.1, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent No.4. Admittedly, the subject land, wherein the petitioner is stated to have been living by erecting a thatched house, belongs to Pothavaram Grampanchayat and no patta is granted to the petitioner in respect of the said land. Thus, the petitioner has no right whatsoever over the said land and no directions preventing his eviction therefrom can be issued by this Court. So far as the grievance of the petitioner that he is not being allotted house site under Indiramma Housing Scheme is concerned, according to the respondents, the petitioner is not entitled for the same at Pothavaram Village, as he is not a resident of Pothavaram Village, but is a resident of Kapavaram Village and having a residential house there. Therefore, this Court cannot grant any relief to the petitioner regarding allotment of alternative house site and the petitioner is always at liberty to challenge the denial of allotment of house site to him under Indiramma Housing Scheme, in appropriate proceedings. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with the aforesaid liberty. No order as to costs. __________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 23rd July, 2009 IBL