IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2208 of 2001 Between: B. Narasimha & others. … Petitioners AND The Collector, Hyderabad district, Hyderabad, & others. … Respondent Counsel for the petitioners : Sri M. Rama Rao Counsel for respondents 1&2: AGP for Revenue This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2208 of 2001 ORDER:- This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 to 4 in seeking to dispossess the petitioners from their respective plots/houses bearing Nos.18-3-463/41, 18-3- 463/42, 18-3-463/43, 18-3-463/44 and 18-3-463/45 situated in Sy.No.225 of Kandikal Village, Bandlaguda Mandal, Hyderabad District, as illegal and arbitrary. Since the controversy in this writ petition lies in a very narrow compass, it is not necessary to refer to the respective pleadings of the parties. It would suﬃce if it is mentioned that while the petitioners claim that they have been in possession of the abovementioned property by raising constructions thereon, respondent No.2, who ﬁled counter-aﬃdavit, claimed that the property is a Government property classiﬁed as graveyard and that in order to protect the same, he ensured that illegal structures in Sy.No.22 of Amjadowlla Village were partly demolished on 18.01.2001. He, however, denied demolition of any structures in Sy.No.225 of the said village. The question whether the property is a private property or the same belongs to the Government cannot be gone into by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The limited grievance of the petitioners is that even assuming that the property is a Government property, the respondents are seeking to demolish the structures raised by them and dispossess them without following due process of law. I ﬁnd legitimacy in the grievance of the petitioners to the extent that the respondents cannot act highhandedly or arbitrarily without following due process of law even if they are satisﬁed that the petitioners are in occupation of Government land. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to evict the petitioners, if they are continuing in possession of the respective properties mentioned in the writ petition without initiating appropriate proceedings for their eviction. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.2774 of 2001 and WVMP.No.2204 of 2002 are disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 11.08.2008 ES