IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 25434 of 2008 Between: 1 Smt. Patta Kameswaramma, W/o. Late Venkateswarlu, R/o. Ambedkarnagar Colony, Bucchireddypalem Village, Potti Sreeramulu Nellore District. 2 Ganta Krishnaiah, S/o. Mastanaiah, R/o. Ambedkarnagar Colony, Bucchireddypalem Village, Potti Sreeramulu Nellore District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Joint Collector, Sri Potti Sreeramulu Nellore District, Nellore. 2 The Tahasildar, Sangam Mandal, Sri Potti Sreeramulu Nellore 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondent in dispossessing the petitioners from the land in Sy.No. 339/2, admeasuring Ac. 3.00 situated in Tarunavai Village, Sangam Manal, Sri Potti Sreeramulu Nellore District as illegal arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent not to dispossess the petitioners and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.V.RAMANA 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.25434 of 2008 ORDER: The two petitioners are aggrieved by the alleged apprehending action of second respondent in dispossessing the petitioners from land admeasuring Acs.3.00 in survey No.339/2 situated in Tarunavai Village, Sangam Mandal, Pottisreeramulu, Nellore District. It is not denied that second respondent issued notice dated 10.10.2008 calling upon the petitioners to show cause as to why the land should not be resumed for public purpose. It is also not denied that the petitioners submitted explanation and that the matter is still pending before second respondent. Even while resumption proceedings are pending, petitioners approached this Court apprehending that second respondent might dispossess them without conducting enquiry and without passing orders for resumption. This Court, after hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the aﬃdavit accompanying the writ petition and the material annexed thereto, is not convinced that apprehension of the petitioners is genuine. If second respondent had any idea of dispossessing the petitioners high handedly, there would not have been any necessity for issuing show cause notice. The very fact that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioners would speak of bana fide action on the part of second respondent. Now that the enquiry is pending before second respondent he may pass necessary orders after considering the explanation submitted by the petitioners. It is needless to mention that unless and until appropriate orders are passed for resumption of the land, possession of the petitioners cannot be disturbed. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 20th November, 2008 Note: Issue CC by 24.11.2008. (B/o) GHN To 1 The Joint Collector, Sri Potti Sreeramulu Nellore District, Nellore. 2 The Tahasildar, Sangam Mandal, Sri Potti Sreeramulu Nellore District. 3 2CCs to GP for Revenue 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}