IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 13756 of 2007 Between: Ch.Rajendra Prasad and others. ..... PETITIONER AND The Govt. of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 2 others. .....RESPONDENT(S) THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 13756 of 2007 ORDER: The very writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioners 2 to 12 for issuance of patta and preventing them from taking up the agricultural operations in the lands under their occupation situated in Daida village, Gurazala Mandal as unconstitutional and consequently, direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners 2 to 12 for assignment of lands and not to interfere with the possession of the lands of all the petitioners. 2. According to the petitioners, the 1st petitioner is the owner and possessor of a patta land, and the names of the petitioners 2 to 12 have been recommended for assignment of land in their favour as per the proceedings of the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, Gurazala Mandal, in his letter No.400/2002-A, dated 24-08-2005. 3. But it appears from the counter filed by the 3rd respondent that the lands, sought to be allotted in favour of the petitioners 2 to 12, have been allotted in favour of one M/s.Sanghi Cements, Gurujala, and therefore, the petitioners 2 to 12 seek a direction from the Court to consider their cases for allotment of alternative lands in view of the recommendation already made by the 3rd respondent, dated 24-08-2005. 4. Whereas, the 1st petitioner states that he is the owner of the land in an extent of Ac.7.10 cents i.e. Ac.4.80 cents in Sy. Nos.568/66 and Ac.2.30 cents in Sy. No.741. The grievance of the 1st petitioner is that the land, which was sought to be allotted in favour of the petitioners 2 to 12, has been allotted in favour of M/s. Sangi Cements and that the land of the 1st petitioner is also located in that area, therefore, the respondents are trying to fence the entire land including the land of the 1st petitioner and denying him access to his lands. 5. Under those circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent-District Collector, Guntur District, to consider the case of the petitioners 2 to 12 for allotment of alternative land in their favour, taking into account the recommendations already made by the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, Gurujala Mandal, dated 24-08-2005. So far as the case of the 1st petitioner is concerned, the respondents are further directed not to interfere with his land without following due process of law, and for the time being, the 1st petitioner is allowed to cultivate the land as per law. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________________ 20th October 2009 kvr