THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23773 of 2010 Date: 24.09.2010 Between: Gandasiri Ramulu and another ..... Petitioners AND The District Collector, Warangal, and others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Ashok Reddy Kanathala Counsel for Respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in interfering with the construction of petitioners’ houses over an extent of Ac.0.30 guntas comprised in survey No.100/47 of Kodakandla Village and Mandal, Warangal District, as illegal and arbitrary. Petitioner No.1 is the father of petitioner No.2. An extent of Ac.0.30 guntas comprised in the abovementioned survey number was assigned to the father of petitioner No.1. It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that after the demise of the original assignee, they are in possession and enjoyment of the said land carrying on agriculture thereon. The petitioners claimed to have obtained permission for construction of residential houses from the Gram Pancayat, Kodakandla, vide resolution dated 04.03.2010. The grievance of the petitioners is that when construction was sought to be raised, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have been preventing the petitioners from raising construction. In support of the plea of the petitioners that the abovementioned land is covered by laoni patta standing in the name of the original assignee, they have filed No.3 Village Account for the year 2009-10. The petitioners have, however, not filed a copy of the laoni patta containing conditions subject to which the patta has been issued. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments) submitted and in my view rightly that laoni patta which is issued for agriculture purpose cannot be used for a different purpose, namely, residential purpose. The learned counsel for the petitioners has not disputed the fact that the patta was issued to carry on agriculture. This being the admitted position, the petitioners cannot be permitted to use the land for a purpose other than for which patta was granted. In this view of the matter, I do not find any illegality in the objections being raised by respondent Nos.2 and 3 against construction of houses by the petitioners over the agriculture land for which patta has been given to the petitioners. In the premise as above, the Writ Petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.30410 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 24th September, 2010 GHN