HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.27166 of 2010 Date : 20-6-2011 Between : Smt.Rajala Yashoda .. Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Smt. M.Uma Devi Counsel for respondents : None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER: I have heard Smt.M.Uma Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner claimed to have purchased Ac.1-00 of land in Sy.No.107/13 of Suraram village, Qutubullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District on 1-2-1993 under an agreement of sale from one Mari Muttaiah after converting the said land into 16 residential plots. The petitioner allegedly sold 15 plots and kept for herself one plot for her residential purpose. When the petitioner sought to raise the construction, she came to know that one Sujatha was digging foundations in her plot. The petitioner has filed O.S.No.1924/2009 in the court of VIII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District (for short “Civil Court”). She has filed I.A.No.2215/2009 for impounding of agreement of sale dated 1-2-1993. When the said document was sent to the District Collector’s office for collecting the required stamp duty by the Civil Court, the same was referred to respondent No.3 for enquiry and the said respondent in turn has referred the matter to Mandal Revenue Officer, Qutubullapur Mandal – respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 after conducting local enquiry sent report dated 23-8-2010 to respondent No.3 and as per the said report, the land in Sy.No.107/13 was converted into plots and the same is a Laoni patta given to Sri Harijan Balaiah s/o.Balaiah. Respondent No.3, however submitted report dated 28-8- 2010 wherein it is stated that the land in Sy.No.107 of Suraram village is classified as “poramboke sarkari” and that the Government has granted assignment to certain deserving villagers including Harijan Balaiah. Respondent No.2 sent back the document to the Civil Court with the endorsement that as it was reported that the land is classified as “poramboke sarkari”, any transaction in respect thereof is not permissible. Accordingly, the document was returned without being impounded. Questioning this order, the present Writ Petition is filed. After hearing Smt.Uma Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that a Writ Petition for adjudication of the dispute of this nature cannot be maintained. The civil suit filed by the petitioner is pending. The document was sent for impounding on the directions of the Civil Court. If the petitioner has legal and valid objections, she can file appropriate application before the Civil Court in the pending suit requesting for re-reference to the District Collector for impounding the document. If such a course is not permissible, the petitioner is entitled to initiate substantive proceedings before the Civil Court for declaration that the document in question is capable of being impounded. It is not possible for this court to adjudicate on the nature of the land in a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, WPMP No.34709/2010 is dismissed as infructuous. _________________________ Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 20-6-2011 AM