THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 15281 of 2005 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not taking steps to exclude the land measuring Ac.34-91 cents in Sy.No.855/61 of Pidugurala Village and Mandal, Guntur District in pursuance of the letter of the Collector through Rc.No.2030/2005-E2 dated 18.6.2005 and letter of the petitioners dated 24.6.2005 and also issuing G.O.Ms.No.144 dated 30.4.2005 without excluding such land and taking steps to enter into agreement by renewal of mining lease as arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India; consequently, to direct respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to exclude Ac.34-91 cents in Sy.No.855/61 of Pidugurala Village & Mandal, Guntur District. It appears, petitioners are villagers of Pidugurala Village and Mandal of Guntur District. According to them, they are landless poor persons. There is land in an extent of Ac.34-91 cents in Sy.No.855/61 of Pidugurala village, which, according to them, is being cultivated by them and the same can be allotted to them under the Assignment Scheme, since they are landless poor persons. It appears, there is some litigation between the parties. Even earlier, during subsistence of original lease for 20 years, when the petitioners made interference into the land leased to respondent No.6, she filed a suit and obtained injunction and the same had attained finality. However, again when interference was made, respondent No.6 filed E.P. under Section 39(2) (a) of CPC. By that time, petitioners herein filed an affidavit stating that they are not making any efforts to interfere into the suit land, therefore, the allegations made by her were not correct. Under those circumstances, the E.P. was closed. In the meanwhile, the original lease for 20 years, which was granted in 1973, expired and respondent No.6 filed an application for renewal of lease. The original lease was granted against an extent of Ac.254-00 of land initially. However, by the time renewal application was filed, already an extent of about Ac.50-00 of land was utilized for mining of limestone etc. Therefore, the renewal application was limited to Ac.184-07 cents and G.O.Ms.No.144 dated 30.4.2005 was issued. Aggrieved thereby, petitioners filed an application before the respondents-authorities, asking them to delete an extent of Ac.34-91 cents in Sy.No.855/61 of Pidugurala village, since the same is in their occupation. In fact, during pendency of present writ petition, vide order dated 18.7.2005 in WPMP No. 19420 of 2005, interim direction was given to the respondents not to include the land to an extent of Ac.34-91 cents in Sy.No.855/61 of Pidugurala village in the renewal mining lease for limestone in favour of 6th respondent. However, on filing WVMP No. 49 of 2006, WPMP No. 19420 of 2005 was dismissed for default and the said WVMP was ordered. Thereafter, an application was filed by the petitioners to set aside the order of dismissal for default. By an order dated 24.8.2006, the said order of dismissal for default was set aside and the interim order granted on 18.7.2005 was modified directing the parties to maintain status quo with regard to Ac.34-91 cents alone. Thus, respondent No.6 has been mining in the rest of the land. In such circumstances, whether the land in an extent of Ac.34-91 cents in Sy.No.855/61 of Pidugurala village and Mandal needs to be deleted from the renewal granted vide G.O.Ms.No.144 dated 30.4.2005 is a matter of fact to be decided by the concerned authorities and not by this Court. Whether the petitioners were in physical possession of the same, whether they were in enjoyment of the said land and whether they are cultivating it as on today are all matters to be enquired into by the concerned authorities. In a writ petition like this, those aspects cannot be decided on the basis of the affidavits filed by the respective parties. Under those circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents-authorities to conduct enquiry as to whether the petitioners are in physical possession of the land in an extent of Ac.34-91 cents in Sy.No.855/61 of Pidugurala village and Mandal of Guntur District as claimed by them and pass appropriate orders, as per law, after hearing all the parties concerned. Status quo existing as on today shall be maintained over the said land, till such time. The respondents-authorities are directed to complete the entire exercise within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. No order as to costs. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 21-01-2011. MVB.