THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO.33620 OF 2010 DATED:10.11.2011 Between: A. Vasavi Prabhakar and another … Petitioners And The South Central Railways Rep. by its Permanent Way Inspector (M.G.) Ananthapur and another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO.33620 OF 2010 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The limited grievance of the petitioners is that the houses bearing D. Nos.4-89 and 4-90 [D. No.4-69 (old)] admeasuring eight cents situated in S.No.2042, First Road, New Town, Ananthapur, where the petitioners have made further constructions, are alleged to be encroached on the railway property of the respondents. Though the petitioners claimed long standing possession and enjoyment, the respondents railway authorities are alleged to be contemplating dispossessing the petitioners without giving any notice. The petitioners therefore approached this Court apprehending that the respondents may demolish a portion of their dwelling houses without following due process of law. This Court while admitting the writ petition on 31.12.2010 has directed the respondents not to demolish the petitioners’ property bearing Nos.4-89 and 4-90 situated at First Road, New Town Ananthapur, except by due process of law. The respondents – railways have now filed a counter affidavit together with an application to vacate the interim order wherein they have justified their action by claiming that there is an encroachment on property of the respondents as per the records maintained by the Railways. They have also reiterated that process of eviction of unauthorized occupation will be taken up after duly following the procedure laid down in Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (for short, ‘the Act’). The respondents submitted that the petitioners have encroached upon 233 .20 sq. mts., of land as per records, but the decision as to eviction of unauthorized occupants shall be in accordance with the Act and duly keeping in mind the interim directions of this Court referred to above. In view of the said assurance, the apprehension of the petitioners that they would be dispossessed without notice etc., is clearly unfounded. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the respondents to follow due process of law under the Act against the petitioners, if the respondents decided to take further action, if any. No costs. _______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J 10.11.2011 bnr