IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO:10937 of 2004 Between: D.Rama Prasad Rao, S/o Rama Koteswara Rao, r/o Khagaznagar, Adilabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Khagaznagar (M), Adilabad District. 2 The Joint Collector, Adilabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR. B.NAGI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to set aside notice, dated 04.06.2004 issued by respondent No.1 to the extent it relates to Survey No.72 of Mosam Village, Kagaznagar Mandal, Adilabad District. Heard Sri B.Nagi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. There was a dispute regarding Eucalyptus plantation raised in an extent of 50 acres of land in Survey No.165 of Mosam Village. Against an order passed under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 by respondent No.2 in respect of the said property, the petitioner filed appeal before the Sub-Collector, Asifabad, who in turn, permitted the petitioner to cut Eucalyptus trees subject to certain conditions. When the petitioner started felling those trees, on a reference made by respondent No.1 to him, respondent No.2 issued proceedings, dated 13.10.1993 wherein he rejected/cancelled the felling permission granted in favour of the petitioner holding that the petitioner has no title over the land in Survey No.165 as it was a Government land. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the said order in Writ Petition No.19106 of 1993, which was dismissed by this Court by order, dated 11.03.2004. Purporting to take follow-up action in pursuance of the order of this Court, respondent No.1 issued the impugned notice wherein the petitioner was informed that the lands in Survey Nos.72 and 165 PP of Mosam Village along with the standing crop of Eucalyptus trees were taken into Government custody with immediate eﬀect. He also directed the petitioner not to enter the said lands. From a perusal of the record, it is evident that the entire dispute was in relation to the extent of 50 acres of land in Survey No.165 of Mosam Village. Neither in proceedings, dated 13.10.1993 of respondent No.2 whereby felling permission was rejected/cancelled nor in Writ Petition No.19106 of 1993, any reference is made to the land in Survey No.72. Respondent No.1 directed the petitioner not to enter the land in Survey No.72 on the basis of proceedings, dated 13.10.1993 and order, dated 11.03.2004 passed in Writ Petition No.19106 of 1993, but not on the basis of any action initiated de hors the said proceedings. As Survey No.72 was never the subject matter of earlier proceedings, reference to land in Survey No.72 by respondent No.1 in the impugned notice cannot be sustained. Unless the respondents initiate appropriate proceedings under the relevant statute and hold that the land in Survey No.72 is a Government land, the petitioner cannot be prevented from enjoying the said property. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed and the impugned notice to the extent it relates to Survey No.72 is quashed with liberty to the respondents to initiate appropriate proceedings in respect of the said survey number, at their option. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 2nd SEPTEMBER, 2008. kvni