IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI WRIT PETITION NO : 1713 of 1994 Between: Smt.P.Chenchu Laxmi W/o.Ranganadha Reddy Tirupathi, Chittoor Dist' .... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Chittoor Chittoor District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi Chittoor District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupathi Urban Mandal, Chittoor District ....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction, more in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the possession of the petitioner relating to the properties covered by the Title Deed No.2539, Dt.4-4/1865 either by assigning it in favour of the third parties or otherwise depsite the pendency of the application filed by the petitioner's vendor under Sec.15(1) of the Estates Abolition Act, as totally arbitrary, illegal, unjust, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner relating to the properties in S.No.34 over an extent of Ac.0.50 cents of Tirupathi village accounts covered under the above said title deed either by assigning the said properties in favour of third parties or otherwise and pass such other order. For the Petitioner:MR.P.JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD,Advocate. For the Respondents.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court Made the Following : ORDER: - Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents has placed on record a communication received by him from Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupathi in which it is stated that the land is in Tirupati village and Tirupathi was never an Inam village. It is also stated that the land is in exclusive possession of S.V. Government Polytechnic, Tirupathi and the writ petitioner has never been in possession of the land. On the other hand, the petitioner claims that the land was purchased from vendors through a sale deed. In view of the rival claims of the parties with regard to the possession of the land, it will not be possible for this Court to decide the issues. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner feels aggrieved, he may agitate the matter in an appropriate forum. 1.7.2004 Glv To 1 The District Collector, Chittoor Chittoor District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi Chittoor District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupathi Urban Mandal, Chittoor District 4. 2 CCs to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 5. Two C.D.Copies.