THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7756 of 2008 ORDER: Today, though W.P.M.Ps. are listed under the caption ‘for Interlocutory’, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal, at the request of the learned counsel on either side. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction by way of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in taking steps to dispossess the petitioners from the land assigned to them in Sy.No.1- 1B of Krishnama Naidu Kandriga village, H/o. Yakasiri Revenue village, Chittamuru Mandal, Nellore District, without following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the husband of petitioner No.1 as well as petitioners 2 to 5 were assigned land in Sy.No.1-1B of Krishnama Naidu Kandriga village, H/o. Yakasiri Revenue village, Chittamuru Mandal, Nellore District, as they were landless poor persons. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they have been in continuous possession of the lands that were assigned to them by cultivating the same, the respondents are taking steps to dispossess them from the subject lands without any authority of law and also contrary to pattas granted in their favour. Respondents filed a detailed counter affidavit, wherein while denying the various allegations made by the petitioners, it is stated that the total extent of the land that was assigned in Sy.No.1/1 is Ac.37.95 cents leaving approximately Ac.3.20 cents as vacant land. It is also stated that the land to an extent of Ac.1.00 was assigned in favour of the husband of the petitioner No.1, 0.50 cents each to petitioners 2,3 and 4 and Ac.1.04 cents to the petitioner No.5. It is further stated that when the total extent of the land covered under Sy.No.1/1 was assigned to 92 persons in all, sub-division of the land in Sy.No.1/1 was not done and, as such, disputes arose. It is also stated that the beneficiaries are unable to identify the land assigned to them. Further, it is categorically stated that when the revenue officials visited the village for the purpose of demarcation of the land that was assigned under 4th phase assignment programme, they were obstructed to enter into the land and, hence, a report was also lodged with the police. It is also stated that since the land is covered with paddy, survey work and demarcation of the land will be taken up in accordance with law soon after harvest is completed and the petitioners will not be disturbed till then. It is stated that after completion of sub-division work, pattadar passbooks will be issued to the petitioners. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. It appears, when the respondent authorities have taken up the work of sub-division of the land, the petitioners approached this Court apprehending their dispossession. Inasmuch as the respondents have categorically denied the allegation that they are trying to dispossess the petitioners from the land and specifically admitted that as the land in question was not demarcated and sub-divided at the time of its assignment to 92 beneficiaries, they entered into the village for the purpose of demarcating the land, it cannot be said that the respondents are acting contrary to the interest of the petitioners. In fact, Sy.No.1/1 consists of large extent of land and small portion of it was assigned to the petitioners, therefore, the said survey number has to be demarcated and sub-divided for the purpose of identifying the extent of the land that is assigned to the petitioners before issuance of pattadar pass books to them. For the aforesaid reasons, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the respondents to take up sub-division work in survey number in question and complete the same as expeditiously as possible. However, it is made clear that the extents of land which are assigned to the petitioners shall not be disturbed, provided their possession is confined to the extents covered by the assignments made in their favour, and if they are in possession of more extents of land than the land assigned in their favour, then it is always open to the respondent authorities to take steps thereupon in accordance with law. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY 28.06.2011 v v