HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 3692 of 2010 DATED: 19.02.2010 Between: Mrs.Celine Fernandez .. Petitioner And The Govt. of A.P. and four others .. Respondents O R D E R:- The petitioner asserts that she purchased an extent of Ac.4.03 guntas of land in Sy.No.24/3 situated in Tirumalagiri village, from the State Bank of India, under a registered sale deed dated 01.02.1962, and since then, she has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. While so, she states that the Government granted house-site pattas initially to seven individuals in respect of the land belonging to her. Then, she made representation to the 3rd respondent, who in turn, directed the 5th respondent to conduct enquiry and demarcate the land in question. In pursuance of the directions given by the 3rd respondent, the 5th respondent conducted survey and demarcated the petitioner’s land and submitted a report to the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings dated 21.03.1996, wherein he observed that the house-site pattas granted in favour of the seven individuals cover an extent of 566 square yards of land in Sy.No.24/3 which falls within the property of the petitioner, as such, requested the 4th respondent not to issue house-site pattas to the remaining six beneficiaries. Then, the 3rd respondent issued a letter dated 30.07.2003 directing the 4th respondent to rehabilitate and shift the certificate holders in the proposed housing scheme to the open land near Monda Market in Sy.No.82 situated in Bowenpally village, Tirumalagiri Mandal by evicting the unauthorized persons from the petitioner’s land, but no steps have been taken. Then, the petitioner filed writ petition in W.P. No.15226 of 2004, and this Court, by order dated 26.10.2005, disposed of the writ petition directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, within a period of two months, and the petitioner, by a letter dated 06.07.2006, communicated the order of this Court to the 2nd and 3rd respondents. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that in spite of the letter issued by the 3rd respondent dated 30.07.2003 directing the 4th respondent to evict the unauthorized persons from the petitioner’s land, the official respondents have not taken any steps to remove the encroachments made in her land. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the material placed on record. In view of the letter dated 30.07.2003 issued by the 3rd respondent directing the 4th respondent to take necessary action in the matter pertaining to the patta land in dispute which is recorded in the name of the petitioner in the possession column as per revenue records, and having regard to the fact that no steps have been taken by the official respondents so far in removing the encroachments made in the petitioner’s land, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “Respondent Nos.2 to 5 are directed to give effect to the letter dated 30.07.2003 issued by the 3rd respondent-Joint Collector, and pass appropriate orders restoring the land in question to the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ C.V. RAMULU, J 19th February, 2010 bcj