IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 4474 of 2004 Between: 1 Rapuri Nagabhushanamma W/o.Chinnaiah R/o.Golagamudi Village, Venkatachalam Mandal, Nellore Dist. 2 Perri Chamundeswari W/o.Srinivasulu R/o.Golagamudi Village, Venkatachalam Mandal, Nellore Dist. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, Nellore district, Nellore 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nellore 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Venkatachalam Mandal Venkatachalam, 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 3rd respondent in not assigning the lands in Sy.no.501 of Golagamudi Village, Anikepalli Group, Venkatachalam Mandal, Nellore District to the petitioners as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to assign to the petitioners 5 Acres each of the lands in Sy.No.501 of Golagamudi Village, Anikepalli Group, Venkatachalam Mandal, Nellore District, interms of the Order dated 8.7.1996 in W.P.No.13017 of 1996, by declaring that the petitioners are entitled for assignment of Govt.lands and with all other consequential benefits, monetary and otherwise. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: Heard the counsel for the respective parties. Writ Petition is filed aggrieved that the 3rd respondent has not assigned lands in Sy.No.501 of Golagamudi Village, Venkatachalam Mandal, Nellore District, to the petitioners in an extent of Ac.5.00 each and in terms of the order dated 8.7.1996 in W.P.No.13017 of 1996. The petitioners claim to be in legal occupation and enjoyment of Ac.5.00 each of dry land in Sy.No.501 of the aforementioned Village since the last 17 years. They claim to have spent considerable amounts re- claiming the land and bringing it under cultivation. The petitioners claim to be landless poor backward community persons solely dependant on these lands for livelihood. Petitioners made several representations to the respondents for assignment. They allege that at the instance of “the local MLA”, the 3rd respondent is seeking to assign these lands in favour of third parties. The 2nd respondent in a letter dated 21.5.1996 directed the 3rd respondent to enquire into the feasibility of grant of assignment to the petitioners. However, nothing was done. The petitioners filed W.P.No.13017 of 1996 for a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider grant of pattas in respect of the lands in question. By the order dated 8.7.1996, the writ petition was disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider petitioners’ application for grant of pattas and till such disposal not to dispossess them from the lands. Petitioners assert that no action was taken by the 3rd respondent on the directions of this court and that they are still in possession. They apprehend dispossession and have come to the court, since on 28.2.2004 the 2nd and 3rd respondents caused a survey of the lands with a view to assign them in favour of the 3rd parties. On the above pleadings, the relief already adverted to is sought. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the total land in Sy.No.501 is Ac.8.78 cents, whereas the petitioners’ claim to be in possession of Ac.10.00 in the said survey number. The answering respondent denies collection of any land revenue from the petitioners as alleged and states that the petitioners are not in possession of the lands. According to the 3rd respondent, the petitioners are ‘benamidars’ set up by one V. Ramanaiah, a former Village Administrative Officer of Anikepalli Village. The petitioners’ names were recorded for Faslies 1405 to 1409 in the Revenue records by the interpolations by the then Village Administrative Officer Mr. V. Ramanaiah, who is alleged to be related to the petitioners. The counter further states that on an enquiry by the answering respondent, the 1st petitioner had given a sworn statement that she was never in possession of the property and that the 2nd petitioner is residing in Nellore town. With regard to the allegation that the order of this Court dated 8.7.1996 in W.P.No.13037 of 1996 has not been complied with, the answering respondent states that by an endorsement dated 25.3.2004, the 3rd respondent had informed the petitioners that they are ineligible for grant of DKT patta since they were never in possession of the property and neither for grant of pattas. This endorsement served on the first petitioner on 27.3.2004 could not be served on the 2nd petitioner since she was not residing in the village, but was at Nellore. The counter also states that the question of dispossessing the petitioners does not arise since they were never in possession of the property at any point of time. To the counter affidavit, the 3rd respondent has appended a copy of a statement by the 1st petitioner, wherein she admits that she never cultivated the land in Sy.No.501. This statement is dated 24.3.2004. Though the counter affidavit was filed in 2004, the petitioners have not filed any affidavit refuting the averments in the counter affidavit. In the circumstances, on the principle of ‘non-traverse’, the averments in the counter affidavit must be taken to have been established. Petitioners are therefore ineligible for grant of patta and have also never been in possession of the property. Since the petitioners are seen to have approached this Court with a false plea, they are not entitled to the discretionary relief of Mandamus. In the circumstances above, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. GODA RAGHURAM, J Date: 21.4.2008 cvm