HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9094 of 2005 Date : 08.12.2009 Between : B.S.N.Murthy. …..Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9094 of 2005 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks declaration by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in not regularizing the encroachment made by him into the land to an extent of 464.49 square metres, situated adjacent to Quarter No.2 RT/63, LIGH quarters of Balasamudram in Hanumakonda of Warangal District. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is residing in Quarter No. 2 RT/63 at LIGH quarters in Balasamudram of Hanumakonda town, and that the said quarter was allotted to him on lease basis. It is stated that he is in possession of land to an extent of 464.49 square metres, adjacent to the said quarter, as such, he sought for regularization of the said piece of land in his favour. When there was a notice from the respondents for eviction of the petitioner from the said land, he filed a suit in O.S.No.521 of 1989, before the Court of Principal District Munsif, Warangal, seeking perpetual injunction orders against the 2nd respondent-Municipal Corporation. The said suit ended in dismissal and the same is also confirmed by the learned III Additional District Judge, Warangal, in First Appeal in A.S.No.14 of 1995. In the meanwhile, the Government has issued orders, dated 15.11.2000, passed in Memo No.16309/D2/2001-1, proposing to regularize the encroachments made into the excess land at LIGH quarters at Balasamudram, by collecting the market value at the rate of Rs.1200/- per square yard. In this writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that though the land in question is to be regularized in his favour in terms of the Memo issued by the Government, but so far, no orders have been passed regularizing the land in his favour. 3. Counter affidavit is filed by the Commissioner of the 2nd respondent-Municipality. In the counter affidavit, while generally denying the various allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated that as the petitioner has encroached into the park-land, he is not entitled for regularization in terms of the Memo dated 15.11.2000. 4. Though it is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that in the written statement filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent- Corporation in O.S.No.521 of 1989, it was not stated that the land in question is park-land, but however, there is no reason to disbelieve the statement made in the counter affidavit that the said land is a park-land. Once the area alleged to have been encroached by the petitioner is part of the park, as mentioned in the counter affidavit, no directions can be issued for regularization of such unauthorized encroachment. Even the Memo, dated 15.11.2000, issued by the Government is general in nature, which is to be applied only for the vacant lands, but not the areas which are earmarked for parks and common places. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petition for grant of directions as prayed for. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 8th December 2009 ajr