IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 5157 of 2004 Between: Mohd.Hasmath, S/o.Bashamia, R/o.Chinatimmapur, Mulugu Mandal,Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Mandal Revenue officer, Mulugu Mandal,Medak District. 2 Gram Panchayat, Japthi Singayapalli,Mulugu Mandal,Medak Dist. .....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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 1st respondent M.R.O. herein in stopping the construction work of petitioner's house in Sy.No.73/18 situated at Chinatimmapur Village, Mulugu Mandal, Medak District, as illegal, null, void and arbitrary, and to pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The petitioner’s allegation of unlawful interference by the 1st respondent with the construction of a residential house in Sy.No.73/18E in Chinatimmapur Village, Mulugu Mandal, Medak District, has been denied in the 1st respondent’s counter. According to the 1st respondent, one K. Pentaiah started construction in land in an extent of 0.01 guntas in Sy.No.73/17. The petitioner obtained permission from the 2nd respondent-Gram Panchayat for construction of a house in his plot in Sy.No.73/18E, which he inherited from his father, an assignee of a larger extent of land. The petitioner is not entitled to construct a dwelling unit on the land in Sy.No. 73/18E as the assignment was only for the purpose of agriculture. However, there was no interference by the answering respondent with any construction by the petitioner. The 1st respondent had merely called upon Pentaiah not to proceed with any construction in Sy.No.73/17. As the 1st respondent denies any interference with the petitioner’s construction, no orders are required. The Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. GODA RAGHURAM, J Date: 21.4.2008 cvm