APHC010116332021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 6691/2021 Between: Bijivemula Venkata Subba Reddy( Died) and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P SRIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. N RANGA REDDY (SC MC RSEEMA SPSR NLR) The Court made the following: ORDER: Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in seeking to dispossess the petitioners from an extent of Ac.5.00 cents of land in Sy.No.1539 of Chennampalli Village, Badvel Mandal, Kadapa District, without initiating any proceedings under any of the statutes and pending consideration of the representation dated 16.09.2019 made to the 2nd respondent either for grant of assignment of the above said land or to grant alternative lands and the order passed by the Tahsildar, Badvel Mandal, the 3rd respondent herein in 2 his endorsement ref:Spandana/LA/815/2019 dated 06.12.2019 rejecting the claim of the petitioners, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri P.Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms.Sireesha, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation and Sri J.Krishna Praneeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit submitted that basing on their longstanding possession, the petitioners made a representation dated 16.09.2019 for grant of assignment of the subject land or for allotment of an alternative land and pending consideration of the same, the respondent authorities without following the procedure contemplated under law are trying to dispossess them from the subject land. In such circumstances, the present writ petition is filed and this Court on 19.07.2021 granted status quo, as such, prayed to pass appropriate orders treating interim orders an final orders. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader on counter submitted thatthe then Tahsildar passed orders dated 11.10.2012 rejecting the claim of the petitioners for grant of assignment of subject land as per rules in force vide Ref.No.B/631/2012 which was not challenged by the petitioners till date and the same attained finality. In fact, the subject land was alloted to the Badvel Municipality by the competent authority i.e., District Collector vide orders Ref.No.E1/884/2008 dated 02.09.2009 and as of now the said allotment orders are in force. The petitioners are trying to take unwarranted benefit of the legal procedure. However, if the petitioners have conclusive 3 proofs with regard to possession of the subject land, they ought to have filed a suit before competent civil Court with all evidences for appropriate relief but cannot invoke 226 jurisdiction, assuch, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that after receivingthe said endorsement itself the petitioners made a representation to the respondent authorities to atleast allot alternative land so far no orders have been passed on the same. In view of the same, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioners. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on both sides. 7. It is not in dispute that a representation dated 16.09.2019 was made for allocation of alternative land in favour of the petitioners and the same is pending consideration. The contention of the respondents on counter is that on the said representation also they passed endorsement informing that they cannot assign any land and if at all the petitioners have any grievance, they can always approach appropriate forum for grant of assignment but no material is placed on record to the said effect. 8. The record would indicate that earlier when the Badvel Municipality and revenue authorities tried to interfere with the petitioners possession with regard to the subject property, the petitioners got filed W.P.No.28698 of 2012 wherein this Court in W.P.M.P.No.36591 of 2012 passed interim order directing the Badvel Municipality not to interfere with the possession and 4 enjoyment of the petitioners. Thereafter, the said writ petition seems to have been disposed of on 22.11.2023 by duly taking into consideration that the municipality has no proposal to use the land as dumping yard. Further, in the present writ petition, this Court on 19.07.2021, directed both the parties to maintain status quo with regard to possession. 9. Except pleading in the counter that the land has been allotted to the Badvel Municipality by the Collector, there is no material placed on record to substantiate the same. On the other hand, the petitioners, to substantiate their possession of the property, placed on record the Adangals which were issued by the revenue authorities under Right To Information Act, 2005, with regard to the subject property. Along with reply affidavit, the petitioner filed endorsement of the Tahsildar dated 31.05.2022, which would indicate that the 1st petitioner and his family are cultivating the subject property to an extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.1539 of Chennampalli Village, since 40 years. This would indicate that, the petitioners are in possession of the property. 10. This Court cannot decide whether the petitioners are entitled for any assignment or not. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, if at all the respondents want the subject land it is needless to observe that they have to follow due process of law. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 24th January, 2025 RKS