IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 8541 of 2008 Between: V.Arunachalam S/o.Vedaiah, Honorary President Nellore Dist Physically Handicapped Association Padarupalli R/o.Near Ramalayam Dhargamitta Nellore Dist -4 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Dist Collector Nellore Dist Nellore 2 The Superintedent of Police Nellore,Nellore Dist 3 The Principal Secretary To Govt Women & Development Child Welfare & Disabled Welfare Department Welfare Department A.P Secretariat Hyd 4 G.Venkata Lakshmi W/o.Rajagopala Reddy, Mahila Mandali Venkatreddynagar Vedayapalem Nellore Dist-4 .....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 any appropriate writ,order or direction preferably one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not implementating the D.O Letter No.27/PSP/2008 dt.27-3- 2008 of the 3rd respondent regarding the P.C Reddy Physically Handicapped Samajamandiram,Pedarupalli Nellore as illegal arbitray and violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently dispose of the representation dt.30-3-2008 field by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.VENKATA RAGHU MANNEPALLI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 8541 of 2008 Oral order: It is the case of the petitioner that P.C. Reddy Physically Handicapped Samaja Mandiram is being made use of by members belonging to Physically Handicapped Association. While so, respondent No.4 tried to highhandedly occupy the said Samaja Mandiram by fixing the name board Kranthi Mahila Mandali. The petitioner states that they lodged complaint to respondent No.2 police as also to the Human Rights Commission and the same is numbered and pending as HRC No. 789 of 2007. The petitioner states that respondent No.3 also addressed letter dated 27.03.2008 to respondent No.1 to verify the matter and take necessary action to restore possession of the building in question to the petitioner. The petitioner states that they made representation dated 30.03.2008 request respondent No.2 to take appropriate action for restoration of possession, but no action thereon had been taken. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent No.2 and the learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare for respondent No.3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that the official respondents are not able to take possession of the building from respondent No.4 and restore the possession thereof to the petitioner because of law and order problem. Merely because there would be law and order problem, it is not proper for the official respondents to shirk their responsibility. Hence, as directed by respondent No.3, vide his orders dated 27.03.2008, respondent No.1, namely the District Collector shall enquire into the matter and on the basis of the material and records available, he shall take appropriate action on the representation of the petitioner made for taking possession of the building in question from respondent No.4 and restoring the possession thereof to the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 30th April 2008 KSR/Nsr