IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 10226 of 2001 Between: 1 T.Sarojanamma, W/o. Ramanaiah. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 2 T.Devamma, S/o. Polaiah. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 3 T.Sahilaja, W/o. Kotaiah. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 4 L.Chennamma, W/o. Malakondaiah. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 5 L.Thirupathamma, W/o. Srinivasulu. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 6 T.Padma, W/o. Malyadri. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 7 L.Lakshmamma, W/o. Chinnaiah. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 8 T.Venkamma, W/o. Malyadri. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 9 L.Rajeshwari, W/o. Nagabhushanam. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 10 C.Kalavathi, W/o. Malyadri. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 11 S.K.Noorjahan, W/o. Mastan. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 12 S.K. Ranjanibi, W/o. Kamal Basha. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 13 V.Susheelamma, W/o. Kotaiah. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 14 G.Rama Devi, W/o. Maheshwara Rao. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. 15 G.Padmavathi, W/o. Narayana. R/o. Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, Nellore. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kavali, Nellore Dist. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Jaladanki , Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore Dist. 4 Ambati Chenchu Naidu, S/o. Venkata Subbaiah. Kavali. Nellore Dist. (Impled as per Court Orders in W.P.M.P 19409/01, Dt:-4.4.02. 5 Poonam HArikrishna Choudary, S/o. Gopalarao. Thimmasamudram Village, Jaladanki Mandal. Nellore Dist. (Impled as per Court Orders in W.P.M.P 19409/01, Dt:- 4.4.02. 6 Medam Ramakrishnaiah, S/o. Subba Reddy. Kavali. Nellore Dist. (Impled as per Court Orders in W.P.M.P 19409/01, Dt:-4.4.02. 7 Ambati Satyavathi, W/o. Chinakondapa Naidu, Nellore. Nellore Dist. (Impled as per Court Orders in W.P.M.P 19409/01, Dt:-4.4.02. 8 Jagarlamudi Rama Rao, S/o. Chenchaiah. Kavali. Nellore Dist. (Impled as per Court Orders in W.P.M.P 19409/01, Dt:-4.4.02. 9 Ambati Savitri, W/o. Chenchu Naidu, Kavali. Nellore Dist. (Impled as per Court Orders in W.P.M.P 19409/01, Dt:-4.4.02. 10 Ambati Rajsekhar Naidu, S/o. Chenchunaidu Kavali. Nellore Dist. (Impled as per Court Orders in W.P.M.P 19409/01, Dt:-4.4.02. 11 Poonam Laxmi Janakiramaiah, S/o. Gopala Rao. Thimmasumudram (Vill) Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore Dist. (Impled as per Court Orders in W.P.M.P 19409/01, Dt:- 4.4.02. .....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 to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioners from the lands assigned to them in Thimmasamudram Village, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore Dist. is arbitrary, illegal without jurisdiction inviolation of the procedure prescribed in B.S.O.15 and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the land assigned to them in Thimmasamudram Village, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore District, Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.CKRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ASSIGNMENT The Court made the following : HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.10226 of 2001 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed on the apprehension that the official respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioners from the lands assigned to them which is subject matter of this writ petition. 2. The petitioners allege in paragraph-2 of the affidavit as follows: “It is submitted that the 1st petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in Sy. No.24/F of Thimmasamudram village of Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore District; 2nd petitioner is the owner of Ac.1.00 cents in Survey No.24/2E; 3rd petitioner is the owner of Ac.0.97 cents of land in Sy. No.24/2G; 22/1, 26/1, 726/9; 4th petitioner is the owner of Ac.1.00 cents of land in Sy.No.24/2B; 5th petitioner is the owner of land AC.1.00 cents in Sy. No.38/2-2E, 6th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No.22/3; 7th petitioner is the owner of land Ac.1.02 cents in Sy. No.38/2-2F; 8th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in Sy. No.22/2; 9th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents, in Sy. No.38/2-2D; 10th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in S.No.21/2; 11th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in Sy. No.26/3; 12th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in Sy. No.26/2; 13th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in Sy. No.729/2G; 14th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No.724/2H, 723/2A; and 15th petitioner is the owner of the land Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No.723/2E. All the above said land is situated at Thimmasamudram, Jaladanki Mandal, Nellore Distraict.” With regard to the aforesaid land they claim that the Government has assigned it to them. 3. A counter-affidavit is now filed by the 2nd respondent- Mandal Revenue Officer who states in paragraph-2 of the counter- affidavit that it is true and correct that the petitioners were assigned the land in question by the then Mandal Revenue Officer, Jaladanki Mandal, on 30-03-1994 along with pattas available on record. 4. Further in paragraph-3, the 2nd respondent denied that the respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioners from the lands without following the prescribed procedure. It is also stated that the respondents never tried to dispossess the petitioners from the aforesaid lands. 5. In view of the above averments, the apprehension of the petitioners that they are likely to be dispossessed without following due process of law is totally unfounded and cause of action for the writ petition itself does not survive. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. ________________ 05-12-2008 kvr