IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13340 of 2004 Between: B. Subba Ratnamma, W/o. B. Satyanrayana Rao, R/o. Porumanmilla Village, Kadapa, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Porumamilla Mandal, Kadapa District. .....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 issue an order or writ one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the peaceful possession of her land in Sy.No. 1011/1, an extent of Acs.3.28 cents in Rangasamudram Village, unjust and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner : SMT. N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.13340 OF 2004 ORDER : The petitioner herein claims to be in possession and enjoyment of Ac.3.28 cents of land situated in Sy.No.1011/1 of Rangasamudram Village, Porumamilla Mandal, Kadapa District having been granted a DKT patta in the year 1961. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the alleged action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the said land without following due process of law. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Porumamilla Mandal, Kadapa District, the allegation that the respondents are trying to evict the petitioner forcibly has been denied. However, it is stated that the assignment in favour of the petitioner was made under a mistake of fact and that apart the petitioner had also violated the conditions of assignment by selling the assigned land and therefore appropriate steps would be taken following due process of law. In view of what has been stated in the counter-affidavit, it is clear that the alleged forcible disposession of the petitioner is unfounded. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of the land in question in any manner whatsoever without following due process of law. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 19.12.2008 gbs