K.Hanuman Babu, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep., By Its Principal Secretary

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No.11575 OF 2017 ORDER:

Heard Ms.A.Vijayalakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioners and the Assistant Government Pleader (Revenue) for the respondents.

2.

The petitioners pray for the following relief: "to issue writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ order or orders by declaring the action of the respondent No.4 in trying to dispossess the petitioner No.1from the land in Sy.No.390-A to 404-B in plot no.2117 and the petitioner No.2 land in Sy.No.429-3, in plot no.117 situated at Pamidi village and Mandal, Anantapur District and also trying to allot the subject land in favour of third parties without issuing any notice, without following any procedure as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the above plots." 3.

At request of learned Assistant Government Pleader (Revenue), the matter is directed to be listed today for producing the records from 4th respondent. Written instructions, dated 23-06-2017 are placed on record. Relevant portion in the said written instructions reads thus: "The Revenue Divisional officer, Ananthapuramu in his letter L.Dis.No.D2/423/2016 dated 29-04-2016 has directed the Tahsildar, Pamidi to take necessary action for resumption of the house sites under violation of conditions of grant of house site patta. Accordingly, the fact of taking action for resumption of house site pattas have been published in the following news papers:

1.Eenadu District Edition dated 10.06.2016 2.Shakshi District Edition dated 10.06.2016 3.Andhrajyothi District Edition 10.06.2016 But even after issue of paper publication, no objections from the house site beneficiaries are received. Accordingly 1647 House site pattas granted in Sy.no.390-A1 to 404-B1 of Pamidi issued under Indiramma Phase III programme are resumed to the Government for violation of condition of house site patta as they have not occupied site or constructed any structure in the allotted plots and kept them vacant. Vide this office proceedings Rc.No.B/35/2016 dated 04.07.2016. But the House Site plot no.2117 pertains to K.Hanuman Babu, writ petitioner No.1 here in this case has not been cancelled and resumed to Government along with other pattas. The writ petitioner has apprehended that

his House site plot has also been cancelled along with other pattas and without verification of the facts he has filedhe present writ petition in hastily manner.

It is submitted that no proposals have been submitted in respect of plot No.117 in Sy.No.426-3 of Pamidi and the house site patta in plot No.2117 in Sy.No.390-A1 to 404-B1 of Pamidi village has not been resumed to Government." 4.

Learned counsel appearing for the parties, having regard to the written instructions and enclosures, request the Court to dispose of the writ petition.

5.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by placing on record the stand of the respondents. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

_______________ S.V.BHATT, J DATED: 12-07-2017.

Hsd