IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 25164 of 2008 Between: Surla Mallamma W/o. Late Jaggulu R/o. Nimmalapalem Village, Kothavalasa Mandalam, Vizianagaram District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad. 2 District Collector, Vizianagaram District. 3 Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram District. 4 The Tahsildar, Kothavalasa Mandalam, Vizianagaram District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the high handed action of the respondents in dispossessing the petitioner without any notice, is not only illegal, arbitrary and contrary to basic principles of law, capricious and against the Article 14, 16 for Constitution of India and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to demolish the dwellling thatched hut of the petitioner without giving any notice and without following due process of law Counsel for the Petitioner:MASTER KEY LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following Order: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.25164 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner was granted a house site patta along with other persons belonging to scheduled caste (SC). Her hut is allegedly situated on the southern side of village road connecting to Narapalem village main road from east to west, which according to her is existing for more than half a century. She alleges that M/s. Indugubilli Appa Rao and Indugubilli Sanyasi Rao, who have houses on the northern side of the road, encroached upon the village road adjacent to their houses and obstructed her and other villagers from using the road. She and other villagers represented to the oﬃcials. It is alleged that respondent Nos.3 and 4 instead of taking action against the encroachers are taking steps to divert the existing road so as to help the influential people to have access. In the process, the petitioner apprehends that without giving notice her house may be demolished and she may be dispossessed. Therefore, she ﬁled instant writ petition seeking a Mandamus to protect her possession. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made submissions with reference to the petition averments and proceedings of second respondent dated 25.09.2008. This Court also heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, who opposed the writ petition on the ground of locus standi of the petitioner. Attention of this Court has been invited to the proceedings of the District Collector dated 25.09.2008. A perusal of the same would show that during 1983-1984 Government sanctioned weaker section colony for 53 Backward Class (BC) and 25 SC beneﬁciaries by acquiring an extent of Acs.3.73 in survey Nos.12P, 13P, 82P and 83P. In 1999, 10 additional house sites were also granted. The weaker section colony had no proper access and therefore, it is proposed to lay a road to this colony but SCs are obstructing for providing road to the proposed houses near the colony. A committee consisting of four revenue oﬃcials, namely, Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Deputy Director, Social Welfare, Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, and Executive Director, SC Corporation, inspected the site and submitted a report suggesting that the obstruction, if any, should be thwarted by engaging police force. Accordingly the District Collector issued said proceedings directing to sort out problem as per the Rules strictly in force and take police Bandobasth. A perusal of the District Collector’s proceedings would show that the petition averments are not true and correct. There is not even a mention of the house site patta granted to the petitioner where thatched house stands which is likely to come in the path of the new road to be laid. Insofar as the grievance of the petitioner with regard to laying of road is concerned, when the Government provided housing colony to weaker sections and a road is to be laid to such colony, the same cannot be faulted at the instance of a person who claims exclusive right to the road. She has no locus standi to question the action of the Government to lay a road to weaker section colony. Insofar as thatched house which according to the petitioner might be demolished for laying road is concerned, it is needless to mention that unless and until the petitioner is given a notice and dispossessed by providing alternative site to her, she cannot be evicted by force. The writ petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 17th November, 2008 GHN To 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad. 2 District Collector, Vizianagaram District. 3 Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram District. 4 The Tahsildar, Kothavalasa Mandalam, Vizianagaram District. 5 2CCs to GP for Revenue 6 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}