THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.30628 of 2010 DT.07.12.2010 Between: G.Basha and others … Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following ORDER: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the highhanded action of respondent Nos.5 and 6 in not allowing the petitioners to enjoy the house sites and inaction on the part of respondent Nos.1 to 4 in giving protection to construct houses over the house sites assigned to them, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners are stated to have been assigned small house sites, after resuming the land from respondent No.5, who was earlier assigned the said land, on the ground that he has violated the conditions of assignment by selling the property to various private persons, including respondent No.6. It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that when they started construction of houses over the assigned plots, respondent Nos.5 and 6 are highhandedly interfering with their construction activity and that representations made to respondent Nos.1 to 4 did not yield any result. The petitioners filed a copy of representation, dated 09.11.2010, submitted to respondent No.3, wherein it has been stated that respondent No.5 has been preventing them from constructing houses and therefore, they needed protection from him. After hearing Sri Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and perusing the record, I am of the opinion that as the grievance of the petitioners is against respondent Nos.5 and 6, who are private persons, they are entitled to avail common law remedy of a civil suit to restrain respondent Nos.5 and 6 from interfering with their rights to enjoy the properties assigned to them. It is not the pleaded case of the petitioners that any of respondent Nos.1 to 4 have been seeking to restrain them from enjoying their properties. Once the pattas have been granted by the State, the property vests in the assignees, subject to the conditions of assignment. Therefore, the assignees are entitled to protect their possession by availing remedies available to them under law. It is no part of the duties of the officials of the State to further protect the rights of the assignees from the third parties’ interference. Therefore, on the facts of the case, the public law remedy of a writ petition is not available to the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to file a civil suit before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.38995 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) Date: 07.12.2010. VGB