THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.14093 OF 2010 Dated: 27.07.2010 Between: 1. G. Chinna Veeraiah and 12 others. … Petitioners And 1. Govt. of A.P. rep. by its Principal Secretary, Endowments Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad., And 2 others. … Respondents THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.14093 OF 2010 ORDER : This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in attempting to dispossess the petitioners from the houses in their occupation situated in Lankadoddi Village, H/o. Dokiparru Panchayat, Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna District without following due process of law as arbitrary and illegal. This Court while issuing Notice to the respondents, by order dated 18.6.2010 directed that Status Quo obtaining as on that date shall be maintained. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 2 and 3, it is stated that all the petitioners are encroachers on the land measuring 66 cents belonging to the 3rd respondent Devasthanam situated in Sy.No.209/2 of Lankadoddi Village, H/o. Dokiparru Panchayat, Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna District and therefore the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Kakinada having initiated proceedings under Section 84 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30 of 1987), recorded a finding that the petitioners were encroachers and accordingly by order dated 1.8.2006 directed removal of encroachments. In terms of the said order, the Assistant Commissioner vide proceedings dated 9.6.2010 requested the Tahsildar, Gudlavalleru to take steps for evicting the petitioners from the respective encroachments. Thus it is contended that the impugned action of the respondents cannot be held to be arbitrary or illegal. Having regard to the specific stand taken by the respondents that the eviction was already ordered by the competent authority under Section 84 of the Act 30 of 1987, if aggrieved, it is for the petitioners to challenge the same by working out the appropriate remedy as available under law. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that no such orders of eviction are passed so far as the petitioners 7, 8 and 10 to 12 are concerned. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners 7, 8 and 10 to 12 without following due process of law. So far as the other petitioners are concerned, status quo with regard to possession shall be maintained for a period of four weeks from today and in the meanwhile it is open to them to challenge the orders of eviction passed under Section 84 of the Act 30 of 1987 by working out the appropriate remedy as available under law. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Date: 27.07.2010 gbs