IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 12393 of 2004 Between: Smt. K. Sakkubai, W/o K. Venkatesh, R/o 20-6/12, Hema Nagar, Uppal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy East Division, Goshamahal, Hyderabad. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Uppal Mandal, R.R. District. .....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 or direction or orders more particularly writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents herein attempting to interfere with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment and trying to demolish the house bearing number 20-6/12, in Plot No. 95 in Sy.No. 54 admeasuring 200 Sq. Yds situated at Hema Nagar, Uppal, R.R. District, as bad, illegal arbitrary and void apart from violative of letter and spirit of constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere and not to demolish the house structure of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner:MOHD.MUMTAZ PASHA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court at the admission stage made the following ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue. At their request, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission itself. Petitioner claims that she is the owner and possessor of plot No.95 admeasuring 200 sq. yards in Sy.No.54, Hema Nagar, Uppal, and constructed a pucca house in it. In view of the threats made by some antisocial elements and land grabbers, she submitted a representation dated 20.05.2004 to the first respondent requesting to instruct his officials not to interfere with her possession. While so, suddenly, on 10.07.2004, the officials of the third respondent, without giving any notice or proceedings, came to her house and threatened her to demolish the house. Hence, this writ petition. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and having perused the material available on record, it is seen that the main grievance of the petitioner is that some unsocial elements and land grabbers are trying to dispossess her from her house and though she made representation to the first respondent, the officials of the third respondents are threatening to demolish her house. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that pursuant to the decree passed by the Land Grabbing Court in L.G.C.No.215/1995 to 220/1995 dated 24.12.1997, the officials of the respondents are proceeding to remove the structures made by the petitioner. In view of the same, I am of the opinion that proper remedy for the petitioner is to move the Land Grabbing Court for necessary relief. No relief as prayed for can be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ----------------------- 05.10.2004 ksld To 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy East Division, Goshamahal, Hyderabad. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Uppal Mandal, R.R. District. 4 Two CCs. to the Govt. Pleader for Revenue, High Court of A.OP., Hyderabad (OUT) 5 Two CD copies.