THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.7246 of 2011 and 20282 of 2010 Dated 27th December, 2011 Between: Kokkira Veera Raghavamma …Petitioner (W.P.No.7246 of 2011) And The Agent to the Government-cum-District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada and another …Respondents (W.P.No.7246 of 2011) Counsel for the petitioner: Sri K.Venkatesh Counsel for respondent No.1: GP for Social Welfare Counsel for respondent No.2: Sri G.Jaya Prakash Babu The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Since the parties and the subject matter in both the writ petitions are common, they are being heard and disposed of together. In W.P.No.20282 of 2010, the petitioners have sought for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in interfering with and seeking to evict from the land admeasuring Acs.6.60 cents in Survey No.3/1 of Nellipudi Village, Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District without following due process of law as illegal. Petitioner No.2 in the said writ petition filed W.P.No.7246 of 2011 for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.1 in not taking action on representation, dated 17.02.2011, made by her for eviction of respondent No.2. At the hearing, Sri K.Venkatesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, fairly conceded that since the stand taken by the petitioners in these two writ petitions is mutually conflicting, in the sense, while in W.P.No.20282 of 2010, the petitioners asserted that they are in possession of the land, in W.P.No.7246 of 2011, the petitioner has stated that respondent No.2 is in unlawful possession and no action is being taken by respondent No.1 for his eviction. In view of these contradictory pleas, the learned counsel for the petitioners stated that his clients are not pressing W.P.No.20282 of 2010. Accordingly, the said writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. As regards the grievance of the petitioner in W.P.No.7246 of 2011, as noted above, it is her pleaded case that she has inherited the property from her father, who is petitioner No.1 in W.P.No.20282 of 2010, and that respondent No.2 has forcibly occupied Ac.0.60 cents of land in Survey No.3/1 of Nellipudi Village, Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. Her grievance is that even though a representation was made to respondent No.1 on 17.02.2011, no action has been taken by him for eviction of respondent No.2. In his counter affidavit, respondent No.2 has denied the allegation that he is in unlawful possession of the petitioner’s property. Respondent No.2 pleaded that he belongs to scheduled tribe and that under an unregistered sale deed, Ac.0.83 cents of land in Survey No.3/1 was purchased by his wife from the petitioner and that in view of prohibition of registrations, the sale has not been registered so far. In the counter affidavit of respondent No.1, it is inter alia stated that the petitioner’s representation was forwarded to the Tahsildar, Agency Gangavaram for causing a detailed enquiry and submit a report vide order of the Collector, dated 04.03.2011, and that in the meantime, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. At the hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare, on instructions, stated that a report has already been sent by the Tahsildar to respondent No.1 and that further action in accordance with law will be taken on the said report. Inasmuch as respondent No.1 has acted on the petitioner’s representation by calling for a report, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.1 to take further action in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondent No.2. He shall complete this process, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel, interim order, dated 17.08.2010, in W.P.M.P.No.25757 of 2010 in W.P.No.20282 of 2010 shall stand vacated and the interlocutory applications pending in both the writ petitions shall stand disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 27th December, 2011 VGB