THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5223 OF 2009 ORDER: The father of the petitioner donated Ac.2.00 land in Sy.No.149/2 for public use in favour of Samithi President, panchayat Samithi, Kodad, vide Registered document No.249/63 for Primary Health Centre, Kodad. Then the petitioner submitted an application that an excess land of 531 sq.yds was in the possession of the Primary Health Centre and requested to survey the land. Accordingly, as per the directions of the District Collector, Nalgonda, the Assistant Director of Land Survey Department, Nalgonda, surveyed the lands and found that there was an excess of 531 sq.yds. Accordingly, the said land was handed over to the petitioner by Mandal Revenue Officer, Kodad vide proceedings No.B/1666/03 dated 24.09.2003. Then some complaints were lodged alleging that the Assistant Director, Land Survey Department did not survey the land properly. Then the land was resurveyed and it was found that there is no excess land. Then the District Collector issued orders vide proceedings No.E2/7254/2003 dated 23.12.2003 canceling the earlier orders. Then the petitioner filed W.P.No.825 of 2004 against the District Collector, District Coordinator of the Hospital Services, Nalgonda and three others and this Court by order dated 13.01.2004 granted status-quo holding that the petitioner is still in possession of the extent of 530 sq.yds in Sy.No.149/2, Nayanagar, Block No.3, Kodad. 2. Alleging that the petitioner trespassed into the land by damaging the constructions and threatened the employees, a complaint was lodged against him 09.10.2005. A case in Cr.No.191/2005 was registered in PS Kodada Town. Police after completing investigation laid charge-sheet. 3. As seen from the orders of this Court dated 06.12.2004, the status quo granted by this court on 13.01.2004 was made absolute. In view of the same, it is clear that the possession of the excess land was delivered to the petitioner on 24.09.2003 and subsequently, this Court passed status quo orders and then it is clear that the allegation that petitioner trespassed into the land and caused damage cannot be accepted. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings are quashed and the petition is allowed. ________________________________ JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR 15th December, 2011 sp