THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.NO.24543 OF 1998 O R D E R This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1, 2 and 4 in not removing the encroachments made by the 5th respondent in Sy.no.1 of Marikal village, Dhanwada Mandal, Mahabubnagar District in spite of the report of the 3rd respondent that the constructions made by the 5th respondent are in Sy.no.1 of Marikal village Marikal village; as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to remove the unauthorized constructions forthwith. 2. The case of the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is that his ancestors were owners and possessors of the land in Sy.No.1 of Marikal village of Dhanwada Mandal in Mahaboobnagar District and the Government has taken certain land and in the other part of the land, his ancestors have constructed a temple of Sri Nagareswaraswamy Devasthanam and the apartinent land is being enjoyed by the temple and that when the 5th respondent and others made attempts to encroach the land, he made a representation to the 2nd respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Narayanpet, Prakasam District and pursuant to the representation, the land was taken into custody of the 2nd respondents under Section 145 Cr.P.C. Subsequently the husband of the 5th respondent who is the Upa-sarpanch of the village by creating a document that the 5th respondent purchased the plot in Sy.no.3 and started construction of the land and having come to know of the same, the petitioner brought the notice of the same to the 1st respondent – District Collector, Mahabubnagar District and pursuant thereto the 3rd respondent – Deputy Inspector of Survey and Land Records, Narayanpet Division Prakasam District filed a report on 18.7.1997 after conducting survey on 11.7.1997 informing that the constructions made by the 5th respondent are in Sy.no.1. As the respondents 2 and 4 who are the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narayanpet, Prakasam District and the Village Administrative Officer, Marikal Village, Dhanwada Mandal, Mahabubnagar District did not take any action on the report of the 3rd respondent, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 3. Respondents 1 and 2 filed counter and while denying the averments made in the writ affidavit stated inter alia that the land in Sy.No.1 measuring Acs.4-34 cents of dry land was patta land in the name of Kalgatti Chenna Basappa son of Veerappa at Marikal village up to 1954-55 along with the structures existing in Acs.4-23 cents in the said survey number and th e pattadar sold away the extent of Acs.4-23 cents in Sy.No.1 to the Government and accordingly the same was entered in the revenue records and the survey number was given as Sy.No.1/A and in the remaining extent of Ac.0-11 cents, the pattadar donated the land to the temple in the year 1954. The land has been published under Section 6 of the Endowments Regulation Act and entered in the property book of endowments as per the notification no.1152/1153 dated 7.5.1954 issued by the Tahsildar Makthal and subsequently the same was confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments, Mahabubagar and this piece of land in an extent of Acs.0-11 guntas was given Sy.No.1/AA. It is stated that as the adjacent owners tried to encroach the land in Sy.No.1/A, the Government has taken the supervision of the said land under Section 145 of Cr.P.C and notices were also issued to some of the villages who encroached the land and in that process it has come to their notice that the 5th respondent is constructing a house while encroaching in Sy.no.1. The Deputy Inspector of Survey and Land Records, Narayanpet and Mandal Survey of M.R.O. Office Dhanwada demarcated the Sy.No.1/A and reported that the respondent no.5 purchased a plot in sy.no.3 and got constructed residential house and three shops partly encroaching 150 sq. yards in Government land in Sy.No.1/A. The 5th respondent has obtained injunction orders in I.A.No.21/97 in O.S.No.8/97 from Munsif Magistrate Court, Narayanpet misrepresenting the court that she is constructing in Sy.no.3, but completed the construction in Sy.No.1/A. It is stated that the encroachments made by the 5th respondent is in Sy.No.1/A, but not in temple and, therefore, the Government is at loss, but not the petitioner and the 5th respondent It is stated that the appropriate action was initiated against the 5th respondent upon the instructions of respondents 1 and 2 and however the further process is stopped in view of the injunction orders granted by the Hon’ble Munsif Magistrate’s Court, Narayanpet in favour of the 5th respondent. It is stated that the respondents have already initiated action against the 5th respondent in accordance with law. With these averments the writ petition was sought to be dismissed. 4. The 5th respondent filed counter and while denying the averments with regard to encroachment, stated that she purchased the open plot of land admeasuring 110 sq. yards in Sy.No.3 of Marikal village and constructed the house after obtaining necessary permission from the Grampanchayat and the petitioner has no right and has filed frivolous petitions before the authorities only at the instance of ill-disposed persons against her husband. The alleged report dated 16.7.1997 submitted by the 3rd respondent is behind her back and the alleged survey is also behind her back and the same cannot be the basis for seeking the present relief. It is stated that the house of this respondent is situate in Sy.no.3 which is owned by his vendor and the said fact is also evident from the revenue records and that the allegation that the construction was made in Sy.No.1 is not correct and that when the petitioner and his mother started interfering his possession of the plot in Sy.No.3, he filed the suit in O.S.No.8/1997 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Narayanpet for perpetual injunction and the suit was decreed on 18.2.1999. With these averments the writ petition was sought to be dismissed. 5. From the above averments it is clear that the land in question is a Government land and as per the case of the petitioner the husband of the 5th respondent who is the upa sarpanch of the village by creating a document that the 5th respondent purchased the land in Sy.No.3, made constructions in Sy.No.1 and the 3rd respondent – Deputy Inspector of Survey and Land Records, Narayanpet Division Prakasam after conducting survey on 11.7.1997 filed report on 18.7.1997 stating that the 5th respondent made constructions in Sy.No.1. On the other hand the case of the 5th respondent is that the alleged survey and the report are behind her back without any notice and that he purchased the plot admeasuring 110 square yards, Sy.No.3 of Marikal village from its vendor Sri Jngi Narsimhulu by virtue of the registered sale deed dated 27.7.1996 and made constructions in Sy.No.3 and not in Sy.No.1 and that she also filed a suit in O.S.No.8/1997 and obtained decree of perpetual injunction against the petitioner and another on 18.2.1999. The case of the Government is that the 5th respondent made encroachments in Sy.No.1/A and not in temple land in Sy.No.1/AA and they have issued notices under the Land Encroachment Act and their further process is stopped as per the injunction orders granted by the Court. However, the case of the Government is that they have already initiated action against the 5th respondent in accordance with law. 6. In view of the above facts and circumstances, there is any amount of dispute with regard to the constructions made by the 5th respondent i.e., whether in Government land or in Sy.No.3 as pleaded by the 5th respondent and further the 5th respondent has filed a suit in O.S.No.8/1997 and obtained a decree against the petitioner and it is her case that the alleged survey and report dated 18.7.1997 said to have been filed by the 3rd respondent – Deputy Inspector of Survey and Land Records is behind her back. In the counter filed by the respondents 1 and 2 it is specifically stated that they have already initiated appropriate action for removing the encroachments in accordance with law. Therefore, in view of these facts and circumstances and in view of the disputes questions and further as the Government has already initiated action for removing the encroachments from Government land, no orders need be passed in this writ petition and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. AVS ---------------------------------- 20—03—2007