THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9989 of 2009 Date:18.04.2011 Between: Nunavath Soti ..... Petitioner AND The Agent to the Government and District Collector,Khammam and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P.Satyarajababu Counsel for Respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is take up for hearing and disposal of with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. The writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in interfering with the petitioner’s possession of Ac.0.08 cents with property bearing No.7-85/3 of Laxmidevipally Village, Somulagudem Gram Panchayat, Paloncha Mandal, Khammam District without notice as illegal and arbitrary. According to the petitioner, she was granted assignment of house site in respect of the above land on 30.07.1993 and her grievance is that the respondents are seeking to dispossess her without following due process of law. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.3, it is inter alia stated that the petitioner was never granted assignment; that the purported proceedings by which the assignment was granted are fabricated one and that the said proceedings related to issuance of a caste certificate to a person, by name, D.Eppa Narayana, S/o Bangari of Budaga Jangam community (BC). It is also stated that the tax receipts filed by the petitioner were not issued by the Gram Panchayat. On finding that the petitioner indulged in fabrication of a house site patta, a complaint was filed before the Station House Officer, Paloncha Rural Mandal, which was registered for the offences under Sections 427, 448, 468 and 471 I.P.C. In my opinion, if the petitioner has fabricated the house site patta, she is not entitled to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court. However, before holding that the petitioner indulged in fabrication, she is entitled to be given an opportunity of being heard by way of a notice. Accordingly, respondent No.3 is directed to issue notice to the petitioner giving her an opportunity of filing her explanation. If the petitioner files her explanation within the prescribed time, respondent No.3 shall pass an appropriate order and communicate the same to her. In the event of rejection of the petitioner’s explanation or for non-filing of such explanation within the prescribed time, respondent No.3 shall be free to take appropriate action, in accordance with law, in pursuing the criminal case pending against the petitioner. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, interim order dated 13.05.2009 as extended on 14.09.2009 in W.P.M.P.No.12934 of 2009 is vacated and W.P.M.P.No.12934 of 2009 and W.V.M.P.No.3370 of 2009 are disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 18th April, 2011 GHN