IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11078 of 2008 Between: Rongala sriramulu S/o Narayana R/o Gopalapuram, West Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tahsildar, Gopalapuram Mandal, Gopalapuram, West Godavari District. 2 The District Collector, west Godavari District, Eluru. .....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 issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandmaus declring the action of the respondents in taking steps to dispossess the petitioner from the land to an extent Ac. 3.91 cents in Sy. No. 411/1, 411/1F of Gopalapuram Village and Mandal of West Godavari district without issuiing any notice or without initiating any proceedigns under the Land Acquisition Act is illegal, arbitrary, in Violation of the principles of natural justice and in violation of Article 14 of the constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the land to an extent Ac. 3.91 cents in Sy. No. 411/1, 411/1F of Gopalapuram Village and Mandal of West Godavari District without following due process of law in the interest of justice and pass such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper inthe circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.11078 of 2008 ORDER: 1. The petitioner is said to have been assigned an extent of Ac.3.91 cents in Survey No.411/1 and 411/1F of Gopalapuram Village and Mandal of West Godavari District in the year 2003. His grievance is that even while the assignment is subsisting, the respondents are trying to dispossess him and put the land to some other use. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. The petitioner has placed before this court, a copy of the order of assignment. If the petitioner has been assigned the land referred to above and assignment is in subsistence, he cannot be dispossessed from the land. In case the respondents are of the view that the petitioner had violated the conditions of the assignment or that the land is needed for any public purpose, necessary proceedings have to be initiated. Resumption of the land without undertaking any such exercise cannot be sustained in law. 4. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to disturb the possession of the petitioner over the land in question as long as the assignment is subsisting. It is also made clear that it is open for the respondents to initiate necessary proceedings in accordance with law, in case they intend to resume the land on any ground. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 22-05-2008 Stp/Tsr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}