THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7118 of 2002 Date:22.07.2010 Between: P. Jagan Mohan Reddy. ..... Petitioner AND The District Collector, Hyderabad and others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: None appeared Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue Counsel for Respondent No.3: None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to quash the order dated 04.04.2002 passed by respondent No.2. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and perused the record. The petitioner claimed that the Collector, Hyderabad, vide his proceedings dated 06.10.1959 allotted an extent of Acs.5.00 of poramboke land in survey No.321 of Kushaiguda village in favour of Kushaiguda Panchayat for distribution of the same for allotment of house sites under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Board Standing Orders; that the said Panchayat after distributing several plots in an extent of Acs.4.00 out of the said Acs.5.00 to the villagers and landless poor, allowed the petitioner’s father to construct houses and also a rice and flour mills over an extent of Ac.1.00 of leftover land and that in pursuance of allotment, the joint family members of the petitioner’s father and his brothers have built their houses and they have also obtained sanction for construction of rice and flour mill. The petitioner further averred that rice and flour mill was constructed and since then they have been in possession of the property. It is the further case of the petitioner that Kushaiguda village was merged in Kapra Municipality and respondent No.2 has issued a notice calling for objections for alienation of the said land within fifteen days. Questioning the said notice, the petitioner filed W.P.No.23573 of 2001 which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 14.03.2002 permitting the petitioner to file his objections. Accordingly, the petitioner filed his objections on 05.03.2002. After considering the objections, respondent No.2 passed the order dated 04.04.2002 which is impugned in this writ petition. In the said order, respondent No.2 has considered the case of the petitioner in detail and held that various documents produced by the petitioner before respondent No.2 showed that the property of Ac.1.00 which was granted to the family of the petitioner is different and distinct from the land which is proposed to be alienated by respondent No.2 and on this premise respondent No.2 rejected the petitioner’s objections. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2, while reiterating the reasons given by him in the impugned order, he has stated that the land in question was already handed over to respondent No.3 municipality on 12.04.2002 under a panchanama. Having regard to the reasons given by respondent No.2 in his order, it is not possible for this Court to come to a different finding as the question whether the land allotted to the petitioner and the land which was proposed to be alienated to respondent No.3 is one and the same is a disputed question of fact which can be adjudicated by a competent civil Court on the basis of the evidence to be produced by the parties. In this view of the matter, I do not find any reason to interfere with the action taken by respondent No.2. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach a competent civil Court to establish his right and title over the land in question. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.8913 of 2002 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 22nd July, 2010 GHN