THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.19439 of 2004 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer, Palakurthy Mandal in issuing the Memo dated 10.09.2004 calling upon the petitioner to re-construct the bund in the private patta land situated in Survey No.500 of Palakurthy Village and Mandal, Warangal District, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased an extent of Acs.13.29 guntas of land in Survey No.500 of Palakurthy Village and Mandal, Warangal District under a registered sale deed dated 13.11.2003, and since then he is in possession and enjoyment of the said land. After purchasing the said land, he had applied for mutation. Pattadar pass book and title deeds in respect of the said land were also issued in his favour. According to him, the said land is a private patta land. While he was carrying on development work for conversion of the said land into house sites, the first respondent issued a notice dated 24.07.2004 stating that there was a kunta, namely, Yerra Mallaiah Kunta in Survey No.500 and the petitioner had illegally dismantled the bund of the said kunta on 18.07.2004, and therefore, directed him to re-construct the bund, failing which, criminal action would be taken against him. In fact, at the instance of the first respondent, a criminal case was registered against him in Crime No.79 of 20004 on the file of Palakurthy Police Station for the offences under Sections 427 and 430 IPC. After receipt of the said notice dated 24.07.2004, the petitioner had submitted a detailed explanation dated 07.08.2004 stating that the land in question is a private patta land, and therefore, he is entitled to go ahead with the development work. The petitioner had also requested the first respondent to intimate him about the status of the said kunta. However, the first respondent again directed the petitioner to comply with the reconstruction of the bund through the impugned memo dated 10.09.2004, even though in the impugned notice the first respondent admitted that the land in Survey No.500 is a private land, that the Yerra Mallaiah Kunta is also a private property, and there are no ayacuts for the said kunta. This Court, on 19.10.2004, while admitting the writ petition, suspended the impugned memo for a period of four weeks, which was extended subsequently until further orders. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the first respondent stating that a case in Crime No.79 of 2004 was registered against the petitioner for his illegal activity of dismantling the bund of kunta; that after receiving the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the impugned memo was issued calling upon the petitioner to reconstruct the bund, which according to the petitioner is illegal for the reason that the land where the site is situated is a private patta land; that the Gram Panchayat has taken up repair works of the tank from time to time and in fact the District Water Management Project Division has also taken up repairs in 2001 by spending about Rs.1,21,000/- under Water Shed Programme to maintain the ground water in the vicinity of the village and that as the petitioner dismantled the water body in violation of the direction of the Supreme Court in Hinchal Tiwari v. Kalama Devi[1], the first respondent has issued the impugned memo directing the petitioner to reconstruct the bund which was damaged by the petitioner. Similarly, the third respondent-Sarpanch of Palakurthy Gram Panchayat also filed counter-affidavit stating that in view of the defects and irregularities in the mutations of the name of the petitioner, R.O.R.Pass Book No.20217 and title deed issued in his favour in respect of the land in Survey No.500 situated at Palakurthy Village and Mandal were suspended, pending enquiry, by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Janagam vide proceedings dated 20.09.2004; that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangaon reported the same to the District Collector, Warangal on 02.12.2004; that the matter is pending before the Revenue Authorities and that the District Water Management Project Division has taken up repairs to the bund of the Kunta under Water Shed Programme by investing Rs.1,21,000/- in 2001 and it is planned for using it as a Percolation tank to cater water needs of the surrounding residents. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the first respondent has no power or authority to interfere with the private patta lands, and that he cannot issue the impugned memo directing the petitioner to reconstruct the bund, without issuing any notice and without conducting any enquiry. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, at the hearing, produced proceedings dated 20.09.2004 issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangaon, which indicates that the R.O.R. Pass Book and title deed issued in favour of the petitioner were suspended, pending enquiry, on different grounds. However, the learned counsel denied the service of the said order on the petitioner. The learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat submitted that the petitioner is claiming evacuee property and that even though the revenue department has given title deed and pattadar pass book illegally, without following the due procedure, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangaon has suspended the title deed and pattadar pass book and intimated the same to the second respondent-District Collector, and the matter is pending consideration before the Revenue Authorities. The proceedings dated 20.09.2004 issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangaon would indicate that the pattadar pass book and title deeds were suspended pending enquiry and the matter is still pending. On the last occasion, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue was directed to find out the stage of the matter before the Revenue Authorities. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submitted that as of today, no final orders are passed in the matter by the Revenue Authorities. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, since there is no provision of law, which authorizes or empowers the revenue department to direct the petitioner to reconstruct the bund in private patta land, and as the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangaon suspending the pattadar pass book and title deed, which were granted in favour of the petitioner, has not attained finality, I deem it appropriate to quash the notice dated 24.07.2004 and the impugned memo dated 10.09.2004 issued by the first respondent. However, this order does not preclude the respondent authorities to issue fresh notice or take any action in accordance with law. With the above observation, the writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. N.V. RAMANA, J Date: 07.04.2010 va [1] 2001 All CJ. 1604