IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 124 of 2008 Between: 1 Kopparthi Seetaravamma W/o. Sanjeevarao R/o.Dosapadu, Denduluru Mandal, W.G. DIstrict. 2 Bolle Pusparajyam W/o. Venkateswara Rao R/o.Dosapadu, Denduluru Mandal, W.G. DIstrict. 3 Kote Yesu Bhakti S/o. Bhushanam @ Ysobu R/o.Dosapadu, Denduluru Mandal, W.G. DIstrict. 4 Kaali VilsonS/.Asheervadam 40 R/o.Dosapadu, Denduluru Mandal, W.G. DIstrict. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, W.G. District at Eluru 2 The Mandal Tahsildar, Dendulutu Mandal, Denduluru, W.G. DIstrict. 3 The Sub Inspector of Police, Denduluru P.S. Denduluru 4 The Village Revenue Officer, Dosapadu Village, Denduluru Mandal. .....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 order or orders or direction more particularly in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in resorting to evict the petitioners from their lands situated in Sy.No. 1/5 in an extent of Ac 0.80 cents in Sy.No.1/5 to an extent of Ac 0.80 cents in Sy.No. 1/1A in an extent of Ac 1.20 cents and in Sy.No. 1/5 in an extent of Ac 0.60 cents respectively as illegal, arbitrary, malfidy against to principles of natural justice and contrary to para 15 of the Board Standing Orders and consequentially direct the respondents not to dispossess them from the said lands without following due process of law in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MRKAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 124 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: Questioning the action of the respondents in trying to evict the petitioners from their lands situated in Sy. No. 1/5 in an extent of Ac 0.80 cents in Sy.No.1/5 to an extent of Ac 0.80 cents in Sy.No. 1/1A in an extent of Ac 1.20 cents and in Sy. No. 1/5 in an extent of Ac 0.60 cents respectively, in Dosapadu village, Dendulur Mandal, West Godavari district, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess them from the lands in question, they ﬁled the present writ petition. The petitioners claim that they are landless poor persons and are permanent residents of Dosapadu village in Dendulur Mandal, West Godavari district. That their ancestors along with 50 other families, are in possession and cultivating the lands situated in Sy. Nos. 1/1A and 1/5 of Dosapadu village, for the last more than 40 years. That they succeeded to the said lands from their ancestors. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 claim that they are in possession and enjoyment of an extent of Acs. 0.80 cents each in Sy. No. 1/1A, while petitioner No.3 and 4 claim to be in possession and enjoyment of an extent of Acs. 1.20 cents in Sy. No.1/1A and an extent of Acs. 0.60 cents in Sy. No. 1/5 respectively. Respondent No.2, namely the Tahsildar, Denduluru Mandal, having considered the representations, granted D-Form pattas and pattadar pass books and title deeds only to petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 in respect of the extent of land in their possession. Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 state that they are making on representations for grant of D-Form pattas in respect of the land in their possession, but no action is being taken. They state that when respondent No.1, namely the District Collector, West Godavari, tried to disturb the possession of the occupants on 26.11.2007, some of the villagers, ﬁled suit in O.S. No. 751 of 2007 on the ﬁle of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Eluru, against respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for permanent injunction. That petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 have ﬁled applications seeking to get themselves impleaded as plaintiﬀs therein. While the matters stand thus, the petitioners state that the respondents without issuing any notice are trying to evict the petitioners from the land in question. This Court by order dated 4.1.2008, while ordering notice before admission, directed the parties to maintain status quo existing as on that day for a period of ten days. The said order, later was extended by this Court, until further orders. To vacate the said status quo order, the respondents ﬁled vacate stay petition, accompanied by their detailed counter. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue reiterating the counter averments submitted that only petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were assigned land in an extent of Acs. 0.50 cents each, while petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 were not granted any land. He submitted that in the suit O.S. No. 751 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, ﬁled by some persons against the respondents seeking injunction, petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 sought to transplant themselves as parties. Even though the said Court granted status quo order in I.A. No. 2108 of 2007 in O.S. NO.751 of 2007, the same was vacated vide order dated 12.12.2007. Petitioners were issued notices of eviction dated 12.12.2007, but they refused to take the same. He submitted that the Gram Panchayat, Dosapadu, has passed a resolution for conversion of the land in an extent of Acs. 5.00 in R.S. No. 1/1A into a tank. The land of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 does not fall under the said survey number. The land of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, which falls in Sy. No. 1 and 2 is covered by R.S. No. 1/5, and since the same is classiﬁed as village site, the same was identiﬁed for grant of house sites to poor under Indiramma Programme. The land of petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 does not cover in the proposals relating to conversion of the land into a tank or for providing house sites to poor persons. He submitted that out of an extent of Acs. 41.15 cents of land in R.S. NO. 1/1A of Dosapadu village, an extent of Acs. 15.00 is taken for construction of three tanks, an extent of Ac. 3.00 for ﬁsh tank, an extent of Acs. 2.00 for Rajaka tank and an extent of Acs. 6.15 for burial ground, and that out of the remaining extent of Acs. 26.15 cents, an extent of Acs.15.00 is under cultivation by 38 landless poor persons. Out of the said land, only two persons were granted pattas in respect of an extent of Ac. 1.00 and Ac. 0.50 cents respectively in Sy. No. 1/1A. While in respect of the land in an extent of Acs. 2.00 in R.S. No. 1/5 of Dosapadu village, four persons, including petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were granted pattas each in an extent of Ac. 0.50 cents. In fact, the Gram Panchayat, on 23.07.2007, has passed resolution Nos. 15 and 16 for utilizing the land in an extent of Acs. 2.00 in Sy. No. 1/5 of Dosapadu village, for providing house sites to 70 persons. He further submitted that proposals for cancellation of D-Form pattas, granted to the six persons, namely four persons in respect of the land in R.S. No. 1/5 and two persons in respect of the land in R.S. No. 1/1A, and accordingly, the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, vide proceedings dated 12.12.2007, cancelled the D-Form pattas granted to the said six persons. He thus submitted that the writ petition be dismissed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. Admittedly, only petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are granted D-Form pattas in respect of an extent of Ac. 0.50 cents each in R.S. No. 1/1A of Dosapadu village. No D-Form pattas were granted to petitioner Nos. 3 and 4. The D-Form pattas granted to petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and four others, considering the resolutions ﬁled by the Gram Panchayat, for constructing tank and providing house sites to poor persons, cancelled by the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, vide his orders dated 12.12.2007. Admittedly, petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, have not questioned the said cancellation orders. Though the petitioners contend that without issuing any notice, the respondents are trying to interfere with their possession of the land, the same is disputed by the respondents, and it is contended by them that though the respondents issued notices, the petitioners refused to receive the same. Further, as can be seen from the pleadings and counter of the respondents, certain persons have already ﬁled suit in O.S. No. 751 on the ﬁle of the III Junior Civil Judge against the respondents seeking injunction, and though the said Court granted order of status quo, the same is said to have been subsequently set aside on 26.12.2007. In fact, the suit is still pending, and petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 have already ﬁled application seeking to get themselves impleaded. Now that petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 have already ﬁled applications, seeking to get themselves impleaded as parties in the suit, and if petitioner Nos. 3 and 4, who admittedly, are not granted pattas, and claim that they also are sought to be evicted from the land in question, they are at liberty to get themselves impleaded in the said suit or avail the remedies available to them in law. For the foregoing reasons, I ﬁnd no merit in the writ petition, and the same is accordingly dismissed. _____________ N.V.RAMANA,J DATE:28.4.2008 TVK/ksr THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 124 of 2008 DATE: 28.4.2008