THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.2155 of 2008 Between: Smt.Tholem Manga. .. PETITIONER and The Government of A.P. and others. .. RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.2155 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner questions the notice issued by the 3rd respondent, in proceedings Rc.No.B/7654/2007, dated 23-01-2008, calling upon her as to why she shall not be summarily evicted from the encroached land admeasuring Ac.0-06 gts. in Sy.No.209 situated at Akulavari Ghanapuram Village, Eturnagaram Mandal, Warangal District. A perusal of the said notice goes to show that the petitioner encroached upon the said land and said land is part of tank bed, which belongs to the Government. Admittedly, the said notice is a show-cause notice issued under Section 7 of A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short “the Act”). It is stated that the petitioner filed an explanation on 24-01-2008 contending that she purchased the said land in the year 1992 for valid consideration and constructed a house bearing No.12-451/9 situated at Akulavari Ghanapuram Village, Eturnagaram Mandal, Warangal District, and the petitioner is in continuous possession and enjoyment of the same. Admittedly, the petitioner is not claiming any independent right or title and there is no serious dispute with regard to the nature of the land i.e., tank bed land. Admittedly, the explanation filed by the petitioner is said to have been pending. If any final orders are passed under Section 6 of the Act, the petitioner has got an effective alternative remedy under Section 10 of the Act. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied on a decision of the Apex Court in Govt. of A.P. v. Thummala Krishna Rao[1]. The facts of the said case has no application to the facts of the present case as it was held by the Apex Court that wherever serious disputes are pending with regard to title, it may not be just and proper for the revenue authorities to have recourse of summary dispossession. In the instant case, I do not see any serious disputes with regard to the title of the property and, therefore, it cannot be said that initiation of proceedings under the Act is illegal and unwarranted. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to pass appropriate final orders, pursuant to the show-cause notice, dated 23-01-2008. Until final orders are passed under Section 6 of the Act, status-quo obtaining as on today with regard to possession shall be maintained. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 07-02-2008 Note: Issue C.C. in three days (B/o) Prv [1] AIR 1982 SC 1081