THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8863 of 2011 Dated 01st April, 2011 Between: M.Ravi Kumar …Petitioner And The District Collector, Mahabubnagar District and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Akkam Eswar For Sri V.Hanumantha Rao Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for Panchayat Raj The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in entering the land admeasuring Ac.1.10 guntas in Survey No.1 of Gudipally Village, Nagarkurnool Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, and destroying the manure pond and the cattle shed as illegal. The petitioner also sought for a declaration that the proposal to construct a school building over the disputed property is illegal. I have heard Sri Akkam Eswar, learned counsel, representing Sri V.Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record. The petitioner has averred that his father has purchased Ac.1.10 guntas of land of Gudipally Village, Nagarkurnool Mandal from its original owners about 36 years ago and that since then the petitioner’s family has been in continuous possession of the same. He has further averred that a school building has been sanctioned recently under RMSA scheme and that the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, in active connivance with the local MLA, hatched a plan to grab the petitioner’s land and in pursuit of the same, they have entered the said land and committed the acts noted above. At the hearing, when this Court has put a query to the learned counsel whether any document is filed in support of the claim that the petitioner is the owner of the property, he replied in the negative. In my opinion, unless the petitioner establishes his prima facie title, he cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court by terming the action of the respondents as illegal. If the petitioner is the owner of the property, he can avail the remedy of a civil suit for declaration of his title and also to restrain the respondents from interfering with his possession. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the common law remedy of a civil suit. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.11007 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 01st April, 2011 VGB