IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 3610 of 2005 Between: Karri Sathireddy, S/o.Venkata Reddy, Aged about 33 years, Occ:Agriculture, R/o.Gangampalem village, Hamlet of Tirumalaipalem, Gokavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada. 2. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Gokavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in resorting to evict the petitioner from the lands in Survey No.115/1 to an extent of Ac.0-71 cents and Sy.No.115/3 to an extent of Ac.3.74 cents, situated at Gangampalem village, H/o Tirumalaipalem, Gokavaram mandal, East Godavari District, as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violative of Article 300-A and Article 31-A(1) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and in violation of the principles of natural justice and consequentlyl direct the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the above lands. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BADANA.BHASKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR REVENUE The Court at the stage of admission made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the respondents in resorting to evict the petitioner from the lands to an extent of Ac.0.71 cents in S.No.115/1 and Ac.3.74 cents in S.No.115/3, situated at Gangampalem Village, H/o.Tirumalaipalem, Gokavaram Mandal, East Godavari District is arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of the said lands and it is alleged that the respondents have been interfering with his possession without following due process of law. Having regard to the assertions made by the petitioner and having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents, without expressing any opinion as to the ownership claimed by the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the lands in question without following due process of law. No costs. _________ 25.02.2005 Note :Furnish C.C.by Monday. (B/O) sh To 1. The District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada. 2. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Gokavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. 3. Two C.Cs to the G.P. for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT) 4 2 CD copies 5 1 CC to MR.BHASKARA RAO