HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO W.P.No.9586 of 2010 Dated: 14-09-2010 Between: K.Jagan Reddy …Petitioner AND The Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Revenue Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad & Others. Respondents. This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO W.P.No.9586 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) Petitioner claiming to be the President of N.N.Colony Association, filed the present writ petition in the form of public interest contending that the respondents, who are in possession of the land in Sy.No.199 to an extent of Ac.12.00, H/o. Kapra, Kushaiguda Village, Keesara Mandal, R.R.District since 1946, should be evicted from the said land as the same was proposed for construction of a stadium. The second respondent issued a letter in Lr.L.C.3/609/03, dated 29.1.2003 requesting the 5th respondent to handover possession of the said land to the fourth respondent herein for the purpose of construction of a stadium. In response, the 5th respondent issued a memo on 4.2.2003 to Mandal Surveyor to survey and handover the said land to the 4th respondent, but so far, the possession of the land has not been handed over to the 4th respondent. Therefore, necessary direction should be issued to the official respondents to evict the respondents 6 to 9 from the said land by implementing the orders, dated 29.1.2003 and 4.2.2003. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing the respondents 1 to 3 and 5 contended that the respondents 6 to 9 along with other joint family members filed various suits against the District Collector, R.R.District; Revenue Divisional Officer, East Division, R.R.District; Mandal Revenue Officer, Keesara Mandal; and the Commissioner of Kapra Municipality contending that they are in possession of the land for more than statutory period acquiring title for various extents of land in Sy.No.199/1 of Kapra Village, Keesara Revenue Mandal, R.R.District. Further, the respondents 6 to 9 along with others filed O.S.No.197 of 2003 before the Senior Civil Judge, R.R.District against the District Collector, R.R.District; Revenue Divisional Officer, East Division, R.R.District; Mandal Revenue Officer, Keesara Mandal; and the Commissioner of Kapra Municipality contending that they are entitled to the land and are in possession of the subject-land in view of the long standing possession and are in possession of various extents of land in Sy.No.199/1 of Kapra Village. Earlier the defendants in the said suit filed L.G.C.No.71 of 1989 against the plaintiffs therein and some others in respect of the suit schedule property, which is in their possession, alleging that they have grabbed the land. The said L.G.C. has been dismissed holding that the plaintiffs in the above suit are in long standing possession and are entitled to the land and they are not land grabbers and the Special Court directed that until their occupation is terminated as per law, their occupation is clearly permissible and cannot be termed as unlawful and that they cannot be treated as land grabbers. Further in O.S.No.1117 of 2009 filed by S.Anji Reddy (6th respondent herein), the Principal Senior Civil Judge, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar allowed I.A.No.1256 of 2009 granting interim injunction restraining the State of Andhra Pradesh and 5 others from interfering with his possession. Similar orders were also passed in I.A.No.398 of 2003 in O.S.No.197 of 2003 directing to maintain status quo with regard to the possession. Therefore, this Court finds, in view of the above civil suits filed and finding recorded by the Land Grabbing Court, it is established that the respondents 6 to 9 are in possession of the subject-land for more than statutory period and they cannot be evicted without following due process of law namely, by filing a civil suit for declaration and establishing title. In view of the above, the present writ petition filed in the form of public interest litigation cannot be entertained and no orders can be passed for eviction of the respondents de hors the orders obtained by the respondents 6 to 9 in the competent Courts. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ SEPTEMBER 14, 2010 RAJA ELANGO, J. Tsr.