IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13146 of 2002 Between: K.Sriramulu, S/o. K.Siddaiah Naidu, R/o. SBI Colony, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Seri Culture, Road No.72, Jublee Hills, Near Water Tank, Hyderabad. 2 The Assistant Director of Seri Culture, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. 3 The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District. 5 Smt.Shakeela, W/o. K.Sardar Ali, R/o. Old Charaka Complex, CTM Road, Opp: To Devata Nagar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor 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 respondent No.2 in issuing proceeidngs RC.No.16/NFS/99/T dt. 19.1.2002 is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, and violative of Article 14, 21 and 300 (A) Constitution of India and also contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently suspend the proceedings RC.No.16/NFS/99/T dt/ 19.1.2002 issued by respondent No.2 in favour of respondent No.5 and also direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners land in Survey No.1050/2, 1051/2, 1051/1 and 1051/2 of an extent of 0.30 Cents, 0.09 Cents and 0.37 Cents situated at Kondamaripalle H/o. Basinikonda Village, Madanapalle Revenue Mandal, Chittoor District and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.13146 of 2002 ORDER: This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings dated 19.01.2002, issued by the Assistant Director of Sericulture-second respondent herein allotting a plot of land admeasuring 35’X30’ from the Government vacant land at Old Charka Complex, CTM Road, Madanapalle in favour of the fifth respondent. The petitioner states that one Mr.Ravi, ex-serviceman was allotted an extent of 0.76 cents of land in R.S.Nos. 1050/2, 1051/1 and 1052/2, Kondamaripalle revenue village of Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, by proceedings dated 19-08-1990, and that he had alienated the said land in his favour through sale deed dated 11.10.2001. The petitioner states that he is undertaking sericulture activity in the said land. The complaint of the petitioner is that on the strength of the impugned order, the fifth respondent is trying to encroach into his property. The second respondent filed a counter affidavit. It is stated that the land allotted to the ex-serviceman- Mr.Ravi was already handed over to Sericulture Department in the year 1983. According to them, the assignment of the land in favour of Mr.Ravi and alienation to the petitioner would not have any effect on the department. It is stated that the fifth respondent was allotted the plot through the impugned order to enable her to do sericulture activity. Second respondent states that in view of the interim orders passed by this court and on finding the land covered by the impugned order is part of the one purchased by the petitioner, alternative site was allotted to the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent filed a counter affidavit almost repeating the contentions advanced on behalf of the second respondent. She challenged the sale in favour of the petitioner on the ground that it is in contravention of the conditions of the assignment. Heard Sri P.Jagadish Chandra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue. None appears for the fifth respondent. The property covered by the impugned order is not described in detail. However, the allegation of the petitioner that the fifth respondent tried to occupy part of his land on the strength of the impugned order, is not disputed. The land purchased by the petitioner was earlier assigned to the Ex- serviceman. Though lands assigned by the Government are not permitted to be alienated, Government issued G.O.Ms.No.1117, dated 11.11.1993 enabling the ex-serviceman to alienate the land assigned to him after expiry of 10 years from the assignment. Respondents cannot take any objection for the sale in favour of the petitioner since it is covered by the G.O. Ms.No.1117. The second respondent allotted the land obviously not being aware of the assignment of the same in favour of Mr.Ravi, much less the alienation of the same in favour of the petitioner. After coming to know about these facts and in view of the interim orders passed by this court, alternative site was allotted to the fifth respondent. For all practical purposes, the impugned order stands annulled with allocation of alternative site to the fifth respondent. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set-aside. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 30.12.2008 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ANURADHA}