THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO.6056 OF 2006 Dated:13.04.2006 BETWEEN M.Narasamma and others ….PETITIONERS AND The Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal at Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District and others. ….RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO.6056 OF 2006 ORDER: The first petitioner is the mother of petitioners 2 to 4. They filed the instant writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to regularise the encroachment of the petitioners in Survey No.234 admeasuring Ac.0.07 guntas situated at Chandanagar village of Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the owners and possessors of land comprised in Survey Nos.228 to 230, 232, 233 and 235 of Chandanagar village and that they also occupied a land admeasuring Ac.0.07 guntas in Survey No.234, which is adjacent to their land. They made applications in 1994 and 1997 for alienation of the said land, as they raised cattle shed thereon, in vain. They also allege that after considering the request, the Mandal Revenue Officer and the Revenue Divisional Officer have made recommendations to the third respondent for alienation of the land, which is pending with him. When the matter is listed before this Court on 27.03.2006, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General) sought time to get instructions in the matter. Today, after getting instructions in the matter, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the land in Survey No.234 admeasuring Ac.0.07 guntas is adjacent to the lands of the petitioners and that they raised a cattle shed in the said land. A reference is made to G.O.Ms.No.1490 to submit that as Chandanagar village falls under ban area, alienation cannot be considered. However, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that any order for alienation of land has to be issued by the Government after considering the report of the fourth respondent. As the application of the petitioners is pending since long time, it would be appropriate to direct the respondents 4 and 5 to consider the applications made by the petitioners which were forwarded by the respondents 1 and 2, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The learned Assistant Government Pleader does not dispute petitioners’ possession as on today. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO,J) 13.04.2006 VGB