IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.25229 of 2008 Between: Gurala Gandhi S/o. Late Sri Venkata Rao R/o. Santhakaviti Village & Mandal, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda, Srikakulam District. 3 The Tahsildar, Santhakaviti Mandal Srikakulam 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 issue a writ or Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the impugned proceedings No. 242/08-A dt.11-11-2008 on the ﬁle of the Tahsildar, Santhakaviti Mandal, Srikakulam District, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of fair play and justice and pass such other orders as deemed ﬁt and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI D.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.25229 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is a resident of Santhakaviti Village and Mandal in Srikakulam District. He alleges that his family had been in possession of land admeasuring Ac.1.00 in survey No.25 forming part of Grama kantam land, where there are other thatched sheds in the land. When the third respondent made attempts to take possession of the land in 1995, the petitioner ﬁled an appeal before the second respondent. It appears, the second respondent by proceedings dated 07.07.1995 directed the third respondent to enquire into the matter and submit a report, and also ordered to stop the proposals to evict the petitioner. The third respondent did not conduct any enquiry. However, on 11.11.2008 the third respondent issued urgent notice requiring the petitioner and two others to be present at Grama kantam land in connection with the visit of Mandal Surveyor. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice informs the petitioner that possession will be taken. According to the petitioner, if possession is taken without following due process of law, it would be unjust and illegal. Opposing the writ petition, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General-AA) submits that notice is issued only in connection with the survey ordered by the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer vide proceedings No.1447/2008 ‘D’, dated 11.08.2008, and therefore, writ petition is not maintainable. The impugned notice reads as under. Lr.No.242/08 ‘A’ Dated 11-11-2008 Office of Tahsildar Santhakaviti URGENT NOTICE Sub: Removal of encroachment from land in Survey No.25 of Santhakaviti Village & Mandal – Reg. Ref: Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda, No.1447/2008 ‘D’ dated 11- 08-2008. In the above reference cited, the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Palakonda, directed to remove the encroachment of Sri.Gurala Jaganmohan Rao and others from the land Grama Kantham in Survey No.25 and take possession to Government. The Mandal Surveyor will visit the land on 13-11-2008 at 10-30 A.M to survey the land. Therefore you are requested to be present on the said date with the documents of title. The Village Revenue Oﬃcer shall also be present with the concerned records. Sd………11/11/08 Tahsildar Santhakaviti Srikakulam District. To 1. Sri Gurala Jaganmohana Rao, Sarpanch, Santhakaviti. 2. Sri Gurala Bangaru Rao 3. Sri Gurala Gandhi, S/o.Venkata Rao 4. The Village Revenue Officer, Santhakaviti. The above notice is a true translation of the notice in Telugu. A perusal of the Telugu notice would show that the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer directed respondent No.3 to take possession of land encroached upon, and therefore, the third respondent directed to conduct survey. In that connection, the petitioner and others were asked to be present with all concerned records. Except stating that Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer directed to take possession, Tahsildar never informed that possession will be taken. Even otherwise, it goes without saying, if the petitioner is to be evicted from the Grama kantam land, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have to follow due process of law by issuing notice and obtaining explanation for evicting the petitioner. There cannot be any manner of doubt with regard to the procedure to be followed by respondent Nos.2 and 3. Be that as it is, impugned notice is only an intimation of survey taken up by the Mandal Surveyor, and the same does not give any cause of action for invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition is misconceived, and the same is dismissed accordingly. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 18.11.2008 vs To 1 The Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda, Srikakulam District. 3 The Tahsildar, Santhakaviti Mandal Srikakulam District. 4 2CCs to G.P for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}