IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.23114 of 2008 Between: 1 Uppalapalli Ragavulu S/o. Malakondaiah R/o. Chinalatarapi Village, Guduluru Mandal, Prakasam District. 2 Mandala Nagamani W/o. Krishna Reddy R/o. Chinalatarapi Village, Gudlur Mandal, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Collector, Prakasam District, Ongole. 2 The Tahsildar, Guduluru Mandal, Prakasam 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 a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the possession of the petitioner's land i.e., in Sy.No.631/1 an extent of 5 acres and 633/2 an extent of 4 acres in Chinalatarapi Village, Guduluru Mandal, Prakasam District respectively, and declare as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and directing the respondents not to evict the petitioners from their respective land without following due process of law and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.23114 of 2008 ORDER: The case of the petitioners is as follows. First petitioner was granted a patta for Acs.5.00 in survey No.631/1 and the second petitioner was granted a patta for Acs.4.00 in survey No.633/2. The land is situated at Chinalatarapi Village of Gudlur Mandal in Prakasam District. Petitioners obtained pattadar pass books, and their names were also entered in the revenue records. It is alleged that respondent No.2 came to the land and gave a direction to vacate the land and started surveying the land. Apprehending that the land will be taken possession forcibly, petitioners filed the instant writ petition. Though this Court ordered notice on 23.10.2008, learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that he did not receive instructions. As the writ petition is filed on a mere apprehension, the writ petition is disposed of in the following manner. If the petitioners are assignees of the land and are in possession, as alleged in the affidavit, and no steps were taken by revenue Officials for resumption of the land for any public purpose or for cancellation for violation of conditions of patta, petitioners cannot be dispossessed without due process of law. This Court makes it further clear that if the petitioners’ pattas have already been cancelled or an order of resumption is already passed, it shall be open to the petitioners to obtain a copy of the order and prefer an appeal before the competent authority like Revenue Divisional Officer/Joint Collector. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 25.11.2008 vs To 1 The Collector, Prakasam District, Ongole. 2 The Tahsildar, Guduluru Mandal, Prakasam District. 3 2CCs to G.P For Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}