THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14981 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner claims right over the premises bearing No.19-4-339/111/1/50 of Chirag Ali Nagar, Kishan Bagh, Hyderabad. Earlier, the petitioner filed O.S.Nos.2345 and 2396 of 2004 in the Court of the VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad against respondent Nos.3 to 6 for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the said property. The suits were dismissed on 31.10.2006. The petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.24826 of 2007 alleging that though respondent Nos.3 to 6 made illegal construction over the said property, respondent Nos.1 and 2 did not take any steps. The writ petition was disposed of on 09.09.2009, directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to pass appropriate orders on the representation made by the petitioner. C.C.No.1033 of 2009 was filed alleging violation thereof. During the pendency of the contempt case, respondent No.2 issued proceedings, dated 22.09.2009, stating that the property described by the petitioner is not traceable and when it was identified by the petitioner, it was found that the persons in occupation thereof are different from respondent Nos.3 to 6. It was further alleged that the residents of the premises have stated that the property was assessed to tax etc. The petitioner challenges the proceedings, dated 22.09.2009. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. The petitioner approached the civil Court by filing suits for the relief of perpetual injunction against respondent Nos.3 to 6, but failed. Once it was found that the petitioner did not have any possession over the land, he cannot object to the activities undertaken thereon. It is also relevant to mention that the trial Court recorded a finding to the effect that the property claimed by the petitioner is not identifiable. Under these circumstances, respondent Nos.1 and 2 can do anything. If the petitioner holds title in property, he has to file a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt: 23.03.2011. kdl