IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16880 of 2005 Between: 1 Kaduru Ilaiah, S/o.Narsaiah, R/o.Rudragudem Village, Warangal district. 2 Gade Rajaiah, S/o.Ilaiah, R/o.Rudragudem Village, Warangal district. 3 Mande Linga Reddy, S/o.Pedda Komuraiah, R/o.Rudragudem Village, Warangal district. 4 Gade Radamma, W/o.Sambaiah, R/o.Rudragudem Village, Warangal district. 5 Malagani Komuramma, W/o.Saraiah, R/o.Rudragudem Village, Warangal district. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Nallabelly Mandal, Warangal district. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsampet, Warangal district. 3 The District Collector, Warangal, Warangal district. 4 The Gram Panchayat, Rudragudem Village, Nallabelly Mandal, Warangal district, Rep by its Panchayat Secretary, .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:Sri.A.Prabhakar Rao Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent No.4:None appeared The Court made the following : O R D E R: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. Heard Sri A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments) for respondents 1 to 3 and perused the record. The grievance of the petitioners, in short, is that the respondents have been interfering with the possession of the lands in their occupation in Survey Nos. 85/1/3, 87/1, 65/2/B, 86, 68/1 and 65/2 of Rudragudem Village, Nallabelly Mandal, Warangal District without acquiring the same for the purpose of planting trees for the development of social forest. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.4 it is averred that in respect of the extent of Acs.2.30 guntas of land belonging to the petitioners, they have not tried to interfere with their possession or plant any trees. He, however, stated that the petitioners encroached into the tank bund land of Errakunta Village in Survey No.65 illegally to the extent of Acs.45.29 guntas and that the respondents planted boundary stones and executed trench cutting work around the said land in April, 2005 and that thereafter the petitioners high handedly removed the stones and encroached into the tank bund land to the extent of Acs.2.30 guntas. He further averred that the respondents have not tried to acquire the patta lands of the petitioners or dispossess them in respect of the lands in Survey No.65/2, 65/2/B, 68/1, 85/1/3, 6 and 87/1. He pleaded that the respondents are taking action to protect the land in Survey No.65/1 alone, which is the Government land and is sought to be encroached by the petitioners. No reply-affidavit is filed controverting the averments contained in the counter-affidavit. Hence, I have no reason to reject the contention of the respondents that the land in Survey No.65/1 is a part of Government tank bund and that the respondents are not interfering with the patta lands of the petitioners situated in the above mentioned survey numbers. While placing on record the statement of the respondents that they are not interfering with the patta lands of the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous. As a sequel to disposal of main petition as infructuous, interim order dated 03-08-2005 is vacated, WPMP No.21454 of 2005 is dismissed, WVMP Nos.2718 of 2005 and 521 of 2006 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated 25th June, 2008 vrn