Vallepu Polu Raju, v. State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.26164 OF 2017 DATED : 07.09.2017 Between :

Vallepu Polu Raju S/o.Veeraiah, Aged about 62 yrs, R/o. Vankayalapadu Village, Edlapadu Mandal, Guntur District & others.

..

Petitioners And State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District & others.

.. Respondents This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.26164 OF 2017 ORDER :

Heard.

2.

Petitioners 1 and 2 and husband of 3rd petitioner are the sons of Vallepu Veeraiah. Sri Vallepu Veeraiah and Vallepu Subbaiah are the brothers and they purchased land to an extent of Ac.2.32 cents in Sy.No.359/C, Vankayalapadu Village, Edlapadu Mandal, Guntur District, through registered sale deed dated 22.07.1956. Venkata Subbaiah and his wife were issueless and died. Subsequent to the death of the father of petitioners 1 and 2 and their paternal uncle, petitioners became the absolute owners of the subject property. While so, the officials of the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, came to the subject property on 20.07.2016 and tried to measure the land. When questioned petitioners were informed that the 3rd respondent directed to dispossess the petitioners. Hence, this writ petition is filed not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property.

3.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader produced copy of the endorsement dated 06.12.2016 issued by the Tahsildar. Through this endorsement petitioners were informed that on physical verification of the subject land, they found that four persons whose names are mentioned therein are in possession of the subject land. 4.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader, fairly submits that Government has no interest in the subject property. Therefore, they are not interfering. The endorsement of the Tahsildar would disclose that there is a dispute between the petitioner and some

- 3 - third parties and the State is no way concerned with the issue. Therefore, no mandamus as sought for can be granted. 5.

Thus, leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their remedies as available in law, against the private parties, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 07th September 2017 Rds