IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 11961 of 2009 Between: 1 M.A Hafeez S/o.Late Bahseerddin Ahmed H.No.7-5-113 Railway Station Road Tandur Town & Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 2 Md.Azheeruddin Ahmed S/o.Late Bahseerddin Ahmed H.No.7-5-113 Railway Station Road Tandur Town & Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 3 Mumtazunnisa Begum W/o.Rasheeduddin Ahmed H.No.7-5-113 Railway Station Road Tandur Town & Mandal, Ranga Reddy District ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh rep.by its Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat Hyderabad 2 The Collector Renga Reddy District at Lakdikapool Hyderabad 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer Vikarabad,Ranga Reddy District 4 The Tahasildar Yalal (M) Ranga Reddy District .....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 declaring the action of the respondents in intefering and distributing the agricultural works in the lands of the petitioners lands admeasuring Ac 23-04 guntas in Sy No.64/1 situated at Kokat(V) Yalal(M Ranga Reddy District as illegal and arbitraryand violation ofArticles14 of the constitution of India and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MOHD.ZIA-UL-HAQ Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.NO.11961 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed on an apprehension that the respondents would interfere and disturb the agricultural operations of the petitioners in lands belonging to them in an extent of Ac.23.04 guntas in Sy.No.64/1 of Kokat village, Yalal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners claim to be the owners of the property and to have been issued pattedar passbooks and title deeds in respect of the said property. It is alleged that the staff of the 4th respondent, namely, Tahasildar, Yalal Mandal visited the property on 04.06.2009 and 09.06.2009 and told the labour not to carry out the agricultural operations as the land is reassigned to others. The petitioners assert that the land is neither assigned by the Government to the petitioners nor their predecessors-in-interest. According to the petitioners, no proceedings have been drawn up for evicting the petitioners or for canceling their assignments if any, nor are any proceedings initiated for acquisition of the land. In substance, what is alleged is an apprehension of employment of force by the 4th respondent or his officials without following the due process of law. In such circumstances and for such grievance the petitioners have a plurality of remedies. They may complain to the jurisdictional police. If on advice, the petitioners are satisfied that any officers including the 4th respondent or his delegates have committed a cognizable offence, they may equally petition the jurisdictional Magistrate by way of a private complaint. In an emergency situation they may also exercise the right of private defence and in any event they may seek injunctive or any other appropriate relief before the civil Court of competent jurisdiction at a location much more proximal to the petitioners’ habitat. In the light of the availability of the several equal and efficacious alternative remedies, this court is not inclined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Relegating the petitioners to pursue the appropriate and alternative remedies, the writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. _________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 19th JUNE 2009 *TSNR