IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.5135 of 2009 Between: Bharadwaj S/o.Viswambaraiah, R/o.H.No.6-6/2, Srinivasa Colony, Mahabubnagar District. ...PETITIONER AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Mahabubnagar. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubnagar. 4 The Tahsildar, Mahabubnagar. ...RESPONDENTS 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 Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the threatened action of the respondent No.4 in demolishing the petitioner house No. 7-5-200/6 situated in Plot No.11, Sy.No. 247, admeasuring 200 Sq. Yds., of Yenugonda Village, Mahabubnagar Mandal and District without due process of law and is arbitrary, illegal against the principles of natural justice and violative of Article 300 of Constitution of India and to direct the respondents not take steps in demolishing the petitioner house No.7-5-200/6 situated in Plot No.11, Sy.No. 247, admeasuring 200 Sq. Yds., of Yenugonda Village, Mahabubnagar Mandal and District without due process of law. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.SOMESWARA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.5135 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner claims to have purchased a plot admeasuring 222 square yards in Survey No.247 of Yenogonda Village, Mahaboobnagar Mandal and District, through a sale deed dated 27.12.2005. He feels aggrieved by the action of the respondents in proposing to demolish the structure thereon. He made reference to various proceedings and submitted that the respondents have no jurisdiction to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the plot. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. The petitioner has placed before this Court, a copy of the sale deed dated 27.12.2005, through which he purchased a plot of 222 square yards. Learned Government Pleader submits that the respondents do not have any objection for the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the plot purchased by him, namely 222 square yards. It is alleged that the petitioner encroached into 47 square yards of the Government land adjoining the plot purchased by the petitioner. This, however, is denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the plot to an extent of 222 square yards purchased by the petitioner through sale deed dated 27.12.2005. It is also made clear that in case the petitioner is found to have encroached into the Government land, it shall be open for the respondents to remove the encroachments. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 6th April 2009 RRB