Dasari Venkata Rao v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No.16260 of 2017 ORDER:

The subject matter of the writ petition is Ac.0-90 cents of land in Sy.No.83/ 4 of Lingapuram Village, Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

The petitioner prays for Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in illegally trying to dispossess the petitioner from the petition land as illegal and unconstitutional. On 28-04-2017, this Court directed the parties to maintain status-quo till 06-06-2017.

I have perused the writ affidavit and also the enclosures on which the petitioner is relying upon.

The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of petition land.

On the other hand, by reference to written instructions dated 30-05-2017, the Assistant Government Pleader contends that the prayer is premature and on the other hand when the petitioner was called upon to place before the 4th respondent the documents on which he is relying upon, the petitioner did not comply with the condition of the 4th respondent and has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court. According to the 4th respondent, the petition land is Government land. The petitioner was Sarpanch

of the village for sometime and claims to be in possession of the petition land without an order of grant from the Government or purchasing the same from persons entitled to in this behalf. She further submits that the petitioner can be given time to place all the doc uments before the 4th respondent, who will consider and if at all adverse situation is notic ed, he will afford opportunity and pass orders in accordance with law. On the existence of standing crop, she submits that as no other person is claiming to have raised the crop, the petitioner may be permitted to cut and harvest the crop.

I have taken note of the rival contentions and this Court is of the view that having regard to the limited grievance and also the stand taken in the written instructions, the writ petition need not be kept pending and continue the interim order, but to meet the ends of justice, the writ petition c an be disposed of by this order.

The parties are directed to maintain statusquo as regards possession of petition land as on 28-04-2017 for a further period of four months from today. The petitioner is given liberty to place before the 4th respondent the documents on which he is relying upon in assertion of title read with possession within four weeks from today. The

4th respondent is entitled to examine the representation and the documents on which the petitioner relies upon in accordance with law. If the 4th respondent comes to the conclusion that the possession of petitioner is objectionable, he issues notice, follows procedure and thereafter dispossesses the petitioner.

The said exercise shall be completed within four months from today.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. _____________ S. V. BHATT, J Dt: 07-06-2017 Prv

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No.16260 of 2017 07-06-2017 Prv