IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.12627 of 2011 BETWEEN Sri Rama Vasaiah.
... PETITIONER AND The District Collector, Chittoor District and another.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. P. JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioner claims that he is in possession of Ac.0.77 cents of land situated in Sy.No.49/6 of Pulluru village, S.R. Puram Revenue Mandal, Chittoor District. Petitioner submits that he owns an extent of Ac.2.05 cents of land in Sy.No.49/1B of the same village and has been in possession of Ac.0.77 cents since several years and his possession is already reflected in the revenue records over the years.
Petitioner submits that in the year 2010, the respondents tried to physically interfere with his possession over the said land and objecting to such interference, petitioner had sent a legal notice in the month of August 2010 and thereafter, no further action was taken by the respondents. But again when there was physical interference by the respondents in trying to evict the petitioner from the said Ac.0.77 cents of land, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
3. While issuing notice before admission on 28.04.2011, this Court directed status quo, as existing as on that date, to be maintained and the said order continues to remain in force.
4. The second respondent, Tahsildar, filed a counter affidavit stating that Sy.No.49/6 is a poramboke land and there have been representations from Yanadi community for allotment of the said land to them. It is stated that adjacent to petitioner’s own land in Sy.No.47/1B, the present subject land in Sy.No.49/6 admeasuring Ac.0.77 cents was encroached by the petitioner and he raised a sugar cane crop and has also sunk a bore well. It is stated that the said land is classified as ‘Gunta Poramboke’ and as such, the petitioner is not entitled to the said land. However, in para 5 of the counter, it is specifically stated that due process of law will be followed before evicting the petitioner from the land.
5. In view of the averments in the counter affidavit accepting that petitioner is in possession of Ac.0.77 cents in Sy.No.49/6, it is obvious that the respondents cannot physically interfere with the possession of the petitioner without taking due recourse to law and due process of law is required to be followed.
In view of that, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent, Tahsildar, not to interfere with the physical possession and enjoyment of the petitioner with respect to land in Sy.No.49/6 admeasuring Ac.0.77 cents. However, this will not preclude the second respondent from issuing appropriate notice giving opportunity to the petitioner and then pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J July 24, 2014 DSK