THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 18650 of 1998 Date: 28.11.2011 Between: Sri Kandukuri Rajeswar … Petitioner And The District Collector, Hyderabad and 2 others. … Respondents HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 18650 of 1998 O R D E R : The petitioner herein claims to be the owner and possessor of house site bearing Plot No. 67 admeasuring 257 square yards, situated in Sy.No.74/6, East Maredpally, Secunderabad, having purchased the same under registered sale deed dated 23.12.1978. This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the respondents in interfering with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the said plot is arbitrary and illegal. This Court, by order dated 10.07.1998, directed that status quo as on that date should be maintained. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, though the title and possession claimed by the petitioner is disputed, it is admitted that the land in Sy.No.74 of Maredpally village admeasuring 3000.15 guntas which is recorded as Government poramboke in pahani pathrikas of 1356 fasli has been under occupation of numerous private individuals. It is further stated that the Government filed L.G.C.No.167 of 1997 before the Special Court constituted under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. It is also brought to my notice by the learned counsel for both parties that L.G.C.No.167 of 1997 was dismissed on 18.03.2010 by the Special Court during the pendency of this writ petition and aggrieved by the same, the Government filed W.P.No.19106 of 2010 which is pending on the file of this Court. The fact that the respondents herein filed L.G.C.No.167 of 1997 itself establishes the fact that the petitioner is in possession of the land in question. That being so, even assuming that the petitioner is an encroacher, he cannot be evicted without taking recourse to law. In the facts and circumstances noticed above, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the plot in question without following due process of law. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 28.11.2011 KLP