IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 14260 of 2001 Between: Md.Dastagiri S/o Md.Sattar R/o Bhoopalli Village & Mandal, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collectr, Warangal. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mulug, Warangal. 3 The Project Officer, Singareni CollieriesCompany Limited, Bhoopalpalli, Warangal 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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents in interferring with the possession of the Petitioner's land in Sy.no.232 to an extent of Ac.3.22gts situated at Bhoopalpalli Village & Mandal of Warangal District, without due process of law id highly arbitrary, bad and illegal and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.PRABHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The petitioner seeks to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, being aggrieved by the alleged action of the respondents in interfering with his possession over the land admeasuring Ac.3.22 guntas in Sy.No.323 of Bhoopalapalli Village and Mandal, Warangal District, without following the due process of law. The petitioner claims ownership and possession over the subject land, stating that his late father had purchased the said land in the year 1960 from one Gone Venkata Rajasimha Rao. After the death of his father, the petitioner stated that his name was mutated in the revenue records, duly certifying his possession over the subject land. He also detailed the proceedings initiated under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short ‘the Act of 1973) in support of his contention that the subject land was his patta land. It is the case of the petitioner that while the land was being treated as excess land under the Act of 1973, the authorities sought to handover the same to the Singareni Collieries, the 3rd respondent. But, in view of the ﬁnal orders passed under the Act of 1973 holding that the subject land was deleted from the computation of the land holding of the original pattedar, the same was not available for such alienation in favour of the Singareni Collieries. The grievance of the petitioner, as demonstrated by his aﬃdavit, is that the Singareni Collieries was interfering with his possession over the subject land though it had no right of ownership over the same. The petitioner alleged violation of his constitutional right to property under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and sought a direction from this Court interdicting the respondents from interfering with his possession without following the due process of law. By an order dated 13.7.2001 in WPMP No. 17835 of 2001 in W.P.No. 14260 of 2001, this Court directed status-quo with regard to possession obtaining as on that date to be maintained. The 3rd respondent ﬁled a separate counter accepting that it was not the lawful owner of the subject land situated in Sy.No.323 of Bhoopalapalli Village and Mandal, Warangal District. However, it is stated that the said land was required by the 3rd respondent-company, as the adjacent lands had already been acquired for the purposes of the company. It is stated that a requisition had been made under letter dated 24.4.2001 of the company, requesting the District Collector to initiate proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act of 1894’) in respect of the subject land, invoking the urgency clause under Section 17 of the Act of 1894. No counter affidavit is filed by the respondents 1 and 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in pursuance of the status-quo order passed by this Court, his client is continuing in possession of the subject land. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent-company, on the other hand, contended that a road had been laid through part of the land in Sy.No.323 and was presently in usage. This is disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who asserted that the said road is abutting the subject land of the petitioner in Sy.No.323 and did not pass through it. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for Respondents 1 and 2, stated on instructions, that the Government had addressed the 3rd respondent-company under letters dated 24.11.2005 and 24.5.2006 requesting conﬁrmation from the company as to its requirement in respect of the subject land along with other lands. This conﬁrmation was requested so that the authorities could initiate action for acquiring the lands in question under the provisions of the Act of 1894. The learned Assistant Government Pleader also submitted that the 3rd respondent- company had failed to respond to the above communications and accordingly, no proceedings had been initiated under the Act of 1894 till date in respect of the petitioner’s land. Once it is established that the petitioner is the owner of the land admeasuring Ac. 3.22 guntas in Sy.No.323 of Bhoopalapally Village and Mandal, Warangal District and that no proceedings had been initiated to acquire the same in accordance with law, it is not open to the Respondents to seek to interfere with his possession over the said land or in any way trample upon his guaranteed constitutional right to property. If the 3rd respondent-company requires the petitioner’s land, it is for them to follow up the matter with respondents 1 and 2 and see to it that appropriate action is initiated under the Act of 1894 for acquiring the petitioner’s land. Without taking recourse to such a step, it is not open to the 3rd respondent- company to seek to occupy, or interfere with, the petitioner’s land. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of directing the respondents herein not to interfere with the petitioner’s land admeasuring Ac.3.22 guntas in Sy.No.323 of Bhoopalapally village and Mandal, Warangal District, without following the due procedure laid down by law. There shall be no order as to costs. ----------------------------------- P.V. SANJAY KUMAR, J DATE: 04.11.2008 CVM