THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.12088 OF 2009 DATED 18TH JULY, 2011 BETWEEN Yalla Narasimha Rao …Petitioner And The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.12088 OF 2009 O R D E R The petitioner was granted leasehold rights over the land admeasuring Ac.15.38 cents in R.S.No.102 of Nadagatla Village, Korukonda Mandal, East Godavari District, by Sri Noolu Venkataratnam Satram, Kovvur Town and Mandal, West Godavari District, the fourth respondent. This lease was from 2007 to 2009, a period of three years. He filed the present writ petition challenging the public auction notice dated 08.06.2009 issued by the fourth respondent Satram for auctioning the leasehold rights over the subject land from 2009-10 to 2011-12. This Court, by order dated 19.06.2009, granted interim stay of the public auction scheduled to be held on 24.06.2009 pursuant to the impugned auction notice, subject to the condition that the petitioner pays rentals as fixed by the respondents every month and furnishes an undertaking to the effect that as soon as the crop is ripe and cut, he shall hand over possession of the land without seeking any further lease. The petitioner is said to have raised eucalyptus crop (jam oil) in the subject land. Sri Keshava Rao, learned counsel representing Sri V.T.M.Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent Satram, states that the petitioner did not make the rental payments as directed by this Court and is perpetuating his possession over the subject land in spite of the expiry of the lease as long back as in the year 2009. Refuting the said contention, Sri S.D.Gowd, learned counsel for the petitioner, stated that in spite of his client tendering the rentals, the respondent Satram refused to receive the same. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the petitioner has no semblance of a right to continue in possession of the subject land after expiry of his lease in the year 2009. Being aware of the fact that his lease was for a specified period, if the petitioner chose to plant a crop which required more gestation time he would necessarily have to take the consequences. Despite the expiry of his lease in the year 2009, the petitioner is still merrily continuing in possession of the subject land. Admittedly, the rentals due have also not been paid, be it for the fault of one party or the other. This Court therefore cannot countenance the petitioner asserting any further claims for continuing his illegal possession over the subject land. The petitioner is yet to harvest the eucalyptus crop and he is stated to be in default in terms of the rentals due for 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. The fourth respondent Satram also seeks interest on the amount of Rs.38,000/- due towards each year’s rentals. The sum claimed by the fourth respondent Satram therefore aggregates to Rs.1,43,000/-. The petitioner therefore has to clear these dues before he can be permitted to harvest the standing crop. It would always be open to him to institute proceedings independently in accordance with law thereafter for recovery, if he disputes the amount claimed by the fourth respondent Satram. Upon the petitioner depositing the amount of Rs.1,43,000/-, the fourth respondent Satram shall permit the petitioner to harvest the standing eucalyptus crop. This exercise shall be completed within one (1) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, it would be open to the fourth respondent Satram to either take steps for harvesting the crop, in the event the petitioner fails to do so, and/or for taking over possession in accordance with the prescribed procedure. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. Miscellaneous petitions filed in the writ petition shall stand dismissed in the light of this final order. No costs. ---------------------------- SANJAY KUMAR, J. 18TH JULY, 2011. PGS/VGSR