THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.17960 and 7749 of 2005 COMMON ORDER: As the issue involved in both the writ petitions is similar, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. In W.P.No.17960 of 2005, petitioners, 9 in number, seek a mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in seeking demolition of their pucca and temporary houses situated in old Survey No.938 corresponding to new Survey Nos.938/A to H and 1/A to G ½ and 2 of Madigododal of Waddepalli, Hanamkonda Mandal, Warangal District, as otherwise due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary. In W.P.No.7749 of 2005, petitioners, 4 in number, seek a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents therein in seeking to evict them from the land in Survey Nos.938/A to H, 1/A to G and ½ (old Survey No.938) of Waddepalli Village for the purpose of allotment to establish 33/11 K.V. sub-station. All the petitioners are owners and possessors of patta land admeasuring Acs.5.24 guntas situated at Waddepalli Village, Hanamkonda Mandal, Warangal District. It is stated that their late great grand father, by name, Tallapalli Mallesham, was the original pattadar and his name was recorded as owner of the aforesaid land in the revenue records. It is further stated that during revision of survey numbers, old Survey No.938 was given new Survey Nos.938/A to H and 1A to G and ½ of Waddepalli Village. It is also stated that during revision, while giving corresponding new survey number to old Survey No.938, the revenue authorities have reduced the area of an extent of Ac.0.18 guntas out of the land in question. It is their grievance that although they are owners and possessors of the land in question and made constructions therein, the respondents are taking steps to dispossess them from a portion of that land by allotting the same for construction of 33/11 K.V. sub-station. W.P.No.17960 of 2005 is filed alleging that the respondent - Municipal Commissioner, Warangal, is taking steps for demolition of the structures on the ground that the petitioners therein have made constructions in the poramboke land, whereas W.P.No.7749 of 2005 is filed alleging that the respondents - District Collector, District Revenue Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer, Warangal, are taking steps for eviction of the petitioners therein from the land in question without following due process of law. No counter-affidavit is filed in W.P.No.7749 of 2005, whereas the respondent - Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, Warangal, filed counter-affidavit in W.P.No.17960 of 2005. In the said counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations made by the petitioners, it is stated that the petitioners have not obtained any permission from the answering respondent and furnished any document in support of their claim. It is further stated that the answering respondent is not a party respondent in W.P.No.7749 of 2005. It is also stated that if the constructions were made unauthorizedly, it is open for the answering respondent to take steps for demolition of the same. Both the writ petitions appear to have been filed only on the apprehension. Even with regard to the claim of the petitioners in W.P.No.7749 of 2005, no notices were issued for their eviction from the portion of the land in question. Even in W.P.No.17960 of 2005, although it is stated by the respondent therein that constructions were made without any permission, no steps have been taken for demolition of such constructions by initiating any proceeding under the Municipal Corporation Act. In the absence of any counter-affidavit in W.P.No.7749 of 2005 and as it is evident from the counter-affidavit filed in W.P.No.17960 of 2005 that no proceedings were initiated for demolition, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents not to evict the petitioners from the structures in question or take steps for such demolition as otherwise due process of law. However, it is made clear that if the petitioners have made constructions without obtaining permission from the competent authority, this order will not preclude the respondents to give notice to the petitioners and take appropriate action in accordance with law. Subject to the above observations and directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 1st OCTOBER, 2010. kvni