Gandavaram Kiran Kumar Reddy v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No. 20997 of 2012 ORDER:

Heard Mr.Ramachandra Reddy for petitioner, and there is no representation for respondents.

2.

The petitioner prays for mandamus directing respondents not to interfere with possession and enjoyment of 0.06 cents of 'Grama Kantam' land in Sy.No.162 of Mekanur village for the purpose of constructing Panchayat office building, and further direct respondents to construct Gram Panchayat building in the place of old building, as per Resolution, dated 08.09.2010, and further hold that the recommendation of Tahasildar in Rc.A.411/ 2012, dated 12.04.2012 as arbitrary and unconstitutional. 3.

The reference to prayers is sufficient to appreciate that the petitioner while seeking protection of alleged possession is praying for multiple directions and declarations. The fact of matter is the petitioner claims to be in possession of subject matter of the writ petition and seeks protection from unauthorized acts of Respondents. The Respondents, as is evident from the counter affidavit, have decided to construct Panchayat Office building in the subject matter. This Court is of the view that the petitioner, if in possession, can at best pray for a direction not to disturb his possession, except in accordance with law. Certainly, the petitioner is not concerned with the other prayers or policy

decisions of local or district administration in constructing a building etc.

4.

Be that as it may, after perusing the stand of 4th Respondent in the counter-affidavit, dated 26.10.2012, and having regard to the interim order dated 13.07.2012, I am satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of by this order.

The parties are directed to continue to maintain the interim order dated 13.07.2012 for a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The 2nd Respondent is directed to call for a physical verification report from Tahsildar and thereafter proceed in the matter as is required by the conclusion of the report.

5.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________ S. V. BHATT, J January 31, 2017 Kv

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No. 20997 of 2012 January 31, 2017 Kv