IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 13180 of 2009 Between: 1 Munuswamy, S/o. M. Sangaiah Ansampally Village, Venkatapuram Post, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor Dist., rep. by their GPA Holder K.Venkata Ramana, S/o.Kodeti Ramaiah, age 39 yrs, R/o.D.No.7-256, Rajeevnagar Grampanchayat, Satyanrayana Post, Jeevakona 2 Venkata Subbaiah S/o. Penchaiah Settipalle Village and Post, Tirupathi Urban Mandal, Chittoor Dist., rep. by their GPA Holder K.Venkata Ramana, S/o.Kodeti Ramaiah, age 39 yrs, R/o.D.No.7-256, Rajeevnagar Grampanchayat, Satyanrayana Post, Jeevakona 3 M. Bathaiah S/o. Late M. Kalaiah Annasompalle Village, Venkatapuram Post, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor Dist., rep. by their GPA Holder K.Venkata Ramana, S/o.Kodeti Ramaiah, age 39 yrs, R/o.D.No.7-256, Rajeevnagar Grampanchayat, Satyanrayana Post, Jeevakona 4 Muramaiah S/o. M. Subramanyam Annasompalle Village, Venkatapuram Post, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor Dist., rep. by their GPA Holder K.Venkata Ramana, S/o.Kodeti Ramaiah, age 39 yrs, R/o.D.No.7-256, Rajeevnagar Grampanchayat, Satyanrayana Post, Jeevakona 5 M. Muniratnam S/o. M. Subramanyam Annasompalle Village, Venkatapuram Post, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor Dist., rep. by their GPA Holder K.Venkata Ramana, S/o.Kodeti Ramaiah, age 39 yrs, R/o.D.No.7-256, Rajeevnagar Grampanchayat, Satyanrayana Post, Jeevakona 6 Chengaiah S/o. M. Gangaiah Annasompalle Village, Venkatapuram Post, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor Dist., rep. by their GPA Holder K.Venkata Ramana, S/o.Kodeti Ramaiah, age 39 yrs, R/o.D.No.7-256, Rajeevnagar Grampanchayat, Satyanrayana Post, Jeevakona ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Revenue (Assignments) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Chittoor District at Chittoor. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi Revenue Division, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupathi Urban Mandal, Chittoor 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioners' from their agriculture lands situated in Sy. No.411/1, 8R Settipalli Village, No.26R, Mangala Group, Tirupathi Urban Mandal, without issuing any notice or opportunity, without following the due process of law, as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands without following the due process of law, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.HEMACHANDRA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The singular grievance in this writ petition is that the 4th respondent is interfering with the petitioners’ agricultural land of an extent of Ac. 6.30 cents in S.No. 411/1, 8R Settipalli vuillage, No. 26R, Mangala Group, Tirupathi Urban Mandal, without following the due process of law. The petitioner claims to be the owners and to be in continuous possession of the property since long. According to the petitioners, on 27.6.2009 the 4th respondent along with his subordinates came and informed them that the land in S.No. 411/1 is proposed for Indiramma Housing; directed the petitioners to vacate the property; and threatened them that in the event they continue in the land, they would remove electricity connections and pump motors. In the circumstances, the petitioners are before this court. As the petitioners are in occupation and possession of the property they cannot be evicted without following the due process of law under the Land Encroachment Act. If the respondents want to acquire the property the title of which vests in the petitioners, they may do so only after following the due process of law under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. Physically dispossessing the petitioners would be contrary to law. Against such an unlawful conduct of the respondents including the 4th respondent and his subordinates, who are in public office, the petitioners have a plurality of remedies. They may exercise the right of private defence; they may complain to the jurisdictional police; they may lodge a private complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate or they may seek an injunctive relief before a civil court of competent jurisdiction by praying for dispensing with the notice under Section 80 C.P.C, if there be an imminent threat. As the petitioners have an effective alternative remedy proximal to their habitat in Chittoor District, this Court is not inclined to undertake adjudication of this grievance under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to pursue appropriate remedies. No order as to costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 3.7.2009. KRB. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION No. 13180 of 2009 Dated: 3.7.2009.