THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.6634 of 2010 March 25, 2010 Between: Smt.Nagani Laxmi, W/o.Late Nagani Muthyalu … Petitioner And The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District And others ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.6634 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner’s husband was allegedly assigned an extent of Acs.2.00 in survey No.93/2 (Part) situated at Ghanpur Village of Medchal Mandal in Ranga Reddy District. Third respondent granted assignment vide proceedings dated 02.9.1986 allegedly after collecting an amount of Rs.190/- from him. It is alleged that in 2000 he approached third respondent for pattadar passbooks. He was asked to surrender the patta. The same was surrendered. On 23.12.2008, third respondent issued notice for leasing of Government land in favour of “Share Medical Care”. Petitioner submitted a representation on 25.12.2008 bringing to the notice of third respondent about the earlier assignment in favour of her husband. She also submitted explanation on 13.11.2009 to the Joint Collector. The same was endorsed by third respondent. He sent a report to first respondent stating that the subject land is proposed to lease out to Share Medical Care and that nobody was found in possession of the land nor there was cultivation for many years. Petitioner, who alleges that the land is in her possession, filed instant writ petition alleging that third respondent is trying to evict her from the land. This Court heard the counsel for petitioner. It is not clear from the affidavit accompanying the writ petition whether the petitioner’s husband is alive not. But a perusal of the report dated 02.12.2009 of third respondent submitted to first respondent would show that petitioner submitted representation on 13.11.2009 to the Joint Collector. The report also states that the land admeasuring Acs.10.02 guntas was declared surplus agricultural land of Venkata Rama Rao and that the land is proposed to lease out to Share Medical Care. It further refers to the allegation of petitioner that her husband along with another was assigned Acs.2.20 guntas out of the surplus land. Therefore the third respondent is required to conduct enquiry and without conducting enquiry, possession cannot be taken. The representation made by petitioner was endorsed by the Tahsildar and, therefore, petitioner may approach the Joint Collector for necessary redressal. The writ petition, in that view of the matter, is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) March 25, 2010 YS