HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7612 of 2008 Date : 09.08.2011 Between : M. Manik Reddy. …..Petitioner And The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7612 of 2008 ORDER : This writ petition is filed, seeking to declare the action of respondents in trying to interfere with the possession of petitioner over the property covered by Sy.No.49, admeasuring Ac.1.28 gts., situated at Aziz Nagar village of Moinabad Mandal in Ranga Reddy District, without considering the representation of the petitioner, dated 27.09.2006, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that his grandfather by name Kanna Reddy was in possession of Ac.6.20 gts. of land covered by Sy.No.49, which was recorded in the Khasra Pahani of 1954-55. After the death of his grandfather, petitioner’s father came into possession of Ac.4.28 gts., which was divided among the petitioner and his brothers and father. It is stated that the petitioner is in possession of his share to an extent of Ac.1.28 gts., in respect of which, he has filed a representation, dated 27.09.2006, for grant of assignment. Pending consideration of such representation, without issuing any notice to him and without giving any opportunity of hearing, the respondents are trying to interfere with the possession of petitioner over the said land. A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the Tahsildar of Moinabad Mandal. In the counter, while denying the various allegations of the petitioner, it is stated that the representation of the petitioner, dated 27.09.2006, was considered and the decision taken on such representation was already communicated to him vide Memo No.B/1245/06, dated 09.08.2010. It is further stated that as the petitioner is not in possession of the said land, the question of issuing notice for evicting him, does not arise. In this writ petition, it is contended by Sri M.Rama Rao, learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner is in possession of the land in question by virtue of division of the entire land of Ac.6.20 gts., which was in possession of their family from the period of his grandfather. It is submitted that even assuming that it is an encroachment, without initiating proceedings under the Land Encroachment Act, 1905, respondents cannot evict the petitioner from the land in question. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents that the petitioner is not in possession of the land in question, and pursuant to his representation, dated 27.09.2006, his claim was considered and rejected vide memo, dated 09.08.2010. Although the relief sought for in the writ petition is based on the claim of possession over an extent of Ac.1.28 gts. of land covered by Sy.No.49, such possession of petitioner is denied in the counter affidavit. It is further to be noticed that along with the counter affidavit, respondents have also filed a copy of the Memo, dated 09.08.2010, wherein, respondents have stated that as much as the village of Aziz Nagar comes under the ban area of assignment as per G.O.Ms.No.1409, Revenue, dated 19.08.1978, the request of the petitioner cannot be considered for assignment of land admeasuring Ac.1.28 gts. covered by Sy.No.49 of Aziz Nagar. Although it is pleaded by the learned counsel for petitioner that there cannot be any interference by the respondents without initiating proceedings under the Land Encroachment Act, 1905, when the respondents have denied the possession of petitioner, in the absence of any material to show that the petitioner is in possession of any portion of land, no relief as prayed for in the writ petition, can be granted. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 9th August 2011 ajr