IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 13950 of 2008 Between: 1 D. Srinivasa Rao, S/o. D. Swamy Rao, R/o. H.No. 2-6-33, T.B. Road, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. 2 S. Ramachander, s/o. Seetaiah, R/o. Wardhannapet, Warangal. R/o. H.No. 2-3-916, Arunodaya Colony, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal, R.R.District. 3 Ch. Bharath Kumar, S/o. Papaiah, R/o. H.No. 2-3-916, Arunodaya Colony, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal, R.R.District. 4 Ch. Kiran Gandhi, S/o. Papaiah, R/o. H.No. 2-3-916, Arunodaya Colony, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal, R.R.District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of A.P. Rep by its Secretary, Department of Housing, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The AP Rajiv Swagruha Corporation Ltd., Rep by its Managing Director, Corporate Office : at Bharath Scouts and Guides, Secretariat Complex, H.No. 1-2-386, Domalaguda, Hyderabad. 3 The General Manager (Projects) The A.P.R.S. Corporation Ltd., at 12-1- 511, G.S.I. Bandlaguda, Uppal Mandal, R.R. 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 issue a writ or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus questioning the action of the respondents in proposing to encroach our lands admeasuring 1136 sq.yards, 1136 sq.yards and 1842 sq.yards in S.No. 47 and 49 situated at Fathullahguda, Uppal Mandal, L.B. Nagar Municipality, R.R. District for the purpose of providing houses under the AP Raji Swagruha Scheme without any notice and without initiating any proceedings under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act as arbitrary, illegal, unfair, unjust and in violation of Art 14 and 300-A of the construction of India apart from contrary to the procedure contemplated under the mandatory provisions of the Landa Acquisition Act Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.KESAVA RAO Counsel for the RespondentS: GP FOR HOUSING The Court at the stage of admission made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION No : 13950 of 2008 ORDER: On an allegation that the respondents, in particular, the 3rd respondent is proposing to encroach on the petitioners’ lands in an extent of 1136 sq. yards and 1842 sq. yards in Survey No. 47 and 49 of Fathullahguda, Uppal Mandal, L.B Nagar Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, for providing house sites under the A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Scheme, the writ petition is filed. Petitioners claim to be the owners and to be in possession of the land above described. It is alleged that on 26.6.2008, the General Manager A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Corporation Limited, who is the 3rd respondent along with subordinate staff and labour visited the petitioner’s property around 11.30 A.M. and started digging trenches. On enquiry by the petitioners, the 3rd respondent informed the petitioners that the property is Government land. When the petitioners sought an interview with the Managing Director of the Corporation, the petitioners were denied appointment and thereafter according to the petitioners, the respondents are taking steps to encroach into the petitioners’ property. The petitioners seek appropriate relief under Article 226 of the Constitution. In view of the averments in paragraph-7 of the writ petition, it would appear that the 3rd respondent asserts the property to be belonging to the State Government. Such assertion may be factually correct or wholly misconceived, but is nevertheless a disputed question of fact which is more appropriately determined by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. Sri P. Keshava Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that since the respondents might dispossess the petitioners unlawfully at any time, the petitioners do not have an effective alternative remedy in view of the dilatory process of issuing a notice under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short ‘the Code’). This contention is stated to be rejected as it is misconceived. In case, urgent relief is required, the petitioners can file a petition for waiver of the requirement of notice under Section 80 of the Code, under Section 80 (2). If the appropriate Court is satisfied, it will pass appropriate orders or at any rate, it is required to record reasons for rejection of a petition seeking waiver of notice under Section 80. The apprehension of the petitioners, has therefore, no basis in law or statutory procedure. In view of the availability of an alternative, efficacious statutory remedy before the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction and in view of the unmanageability of this lis in a public law proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution, this court is not inclined to adjudicate the grievances presented herein. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed granting the liberty to the petitioners to pursue appropriate alternative remedies. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J DATE: 1st July, 2008 Furnish c.c. in two days. B/o Pnb ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Secretary, Government of A.P., Department of Housing, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Managing Director, AP Rajiv Swagruha Corporation Ltd., Corporate Office : at Bharath Scouts and Guides, Secretariat Complex, H.No. 1-2-386, Domalaguda, Hyderabad. 3 The General Manager (Projects) The A.P.R.S. Corporation Ltd., at 12-1- 511, G.S.I. Bandlaguda, Uppal Mandal, R.R. District. 4 2 CCs to the Government Pleader for Housing, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (OUT). 5 2 CD copies