IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 3475 of 2008 Between: Vucha Krishna Kumari W/o.V.V.Narasimha Rao Residing at Bakkannapalem Village, Chinna Gadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tahsildar, Chinnagadhili Mandal, Visakhapatnam Rural, Visakhapatnam. 2 The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its District Collector, Collectorate, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam. 3 The Commandant A.P. Special Police, VI Battalion, Bakkannapalem Pothina Mallayyapalem Post, Visakhapatnam -41. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ or order, more particularly, one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over Ac.0.40 cts of land in S.No.40P of Bakkannapalem village, Chinnagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam as arbitrary, in violation of law, principles of natural justice, and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents not to disturb the possession of the petitioner over the said lands other wise than due process of law. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.RAJAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that she encroached upon Government land admeasuring Ac.0-40 cents in Sy.No.40 P situated at Bakkannapalem Village, Chinnagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam, during the month of September, 1989, and thereafter constructed a shed and residing therein. It is further stated that as per the orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.1601, dated 28-08-2005, the Government decided to regularize the encroachment of the Government land and the last date was notified as 31-12-2005 for filing such applications. It is stated that the petitioner filed an application on 30-12- 2005, for regularizing the said encroachment before the 2nd respondent. But, so far, the 2nd respondent has not considered and disposed of the said application. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submits that the said land was already allotted in favour of the 3rd respondent and the petitioner is not in possession of the said land. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as on date, the petitioner is in possession of the said land. I am not inclined to express any opinion as to who is in possession of the land in question. However, as the application of the petitioner, dated 30- 12-2005, is pending before the 2nd respondent, I am of the opinion that it is just and proper to direct the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the application of the petitioner, dated 30-12-2005. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the application of the petitioner, dated 30-12-2005, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, without any undue delay. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 21-02-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}