Nallipogu Narayanamma v. State Of Andhra Pradesh

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.10589 OF 2018 DATED :02.04.2018 Between :

Nallipogu Narayanamma, W/o.Kotaiah, Aged about 71 yrs, Palukuru Village, Kandukur Mandal, Prakasam District - 523101, State of Andhra Pradesh .. Petitioner And State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi (Capital City), Amaravathi, Amaravathi Mandal, Guntur District & others.

.. Respondents This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.10589 OF 2018 ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue (AP). 2.

Petitioner claims that she own house in Sy.No.531 of Palukur Village, Kandukur Mandal, Prakasam District. Petitioner claims that she has constructed a house in plot No.26 in the above survey number long ago. She purchased Ac.0.01 1⁄2 cents from one Bolliboina Narasimha Rao on 16.05.1956. She constructed bath room in the said place and arranged way for coming and going to outside on south side to main road. Respondents 2 and 3 approved lay out on 01.04.1993. Petitioner has been paying the house tax regularly. While so, some third persons by name Veeramalli Yasodhamma, Veeramalli Chandra Sekhar, Veeramalli Malaiah, Veeramalli Ravi, Veeramalli Srenu, Veeramalli China Nallaiah destroyed her bath room which was constructed 30 years back and they tried to construct a wall infront of her house completely obstructing ingress and egress.

Having come to know their illegal action, a complaint was lodged with the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kandukuru on 24.02.2018 and also filed a complaint with the Station House Officer, Kandukuru. Alleging inaction on the complaint filed before the Mandal Revenue Officer, this writ petition is filed.

3.

The narration of facts in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition itself would disclose that there is civil dispute between the petitioner and her neighbour. If that is so, petitioner has to work out the remedies as available in common law. If there is

- 3 - inter se dispute between the neighbours, the revenue authorities cannot be directed to involve and decide the dispute. It is beyond their competence. Therefore, no relief as sought for can be granted in the writ petition.

4.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to work out her remedies as available in law against the alleged illegal/unauthorised construction of the compound wall obstructing the passage to the house or any other action affecting the rights of the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 2nd April, 2018 Rds