IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9279 of 2000 Between: R.Laxmaiah ………Petitioner and The Mandal Revenue Officer, Hyderabad and another ………Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: NONE APPEARED Counsel for the respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of certiorari to quash proceedings, dated 22.05.2000 of respondent No.1. The petitioner is in occupation of property bearing Municipal No.18-9-278/A, Chandrayanagutta, Hyderabad. He wanted to get his unauthorized possession regularized and accordingly, he approached respondent No.2 for regularizing his possession under G.O.Ms.No.508, dated 20.10.1995. The said request was rejected by respondent No.2 by his proceedings, dated 13.03.2000. The grievance of the petitioner is that when he was making efforts to file an appeal against the said proceedings, respondent No.2 issued the impugned proceedings whereby he directed the petitioner to handover possession within a week, failing which, he will be forcibly evicted. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.1, it is stated that the petitioner’s application for regularisation in terms of G.O.Ms.No.508, dated 20.10.1995 and G.O.Ms.No.972, dated 04.12.1998 was considered by the District Level Committee in its meeting held on 25.01.2000 and the same was rejected on the ground that the property in question does not satisfy the conditions stipulated in the said G.O.s and the same is objectionable. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. A perusal of the pleadings of the parties shows that the petitioner is in unauthorized occupation of Government land. But the petitioner is aggrieved by the attempt on the part of respondent No.1 to evict him without following due process of law. Respondent No.1 in his counter-affidavit has not adverted to this part of the pleading of the petitioner. Even if the petitioner is in unauthorized occupation of the Government land, the respondents are bound to follow the procedure prescribed by law. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. The petitioner shall not be evicted without initiating proceedings under the appropriate statute. It is, however, made clear that if the petitioner was already dispossessed after following due process of law, this order does not enable him to reclaim his possession. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 16th JULY, 2008. kvni