APHC010063492011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 12015 OF 2011 Between: Chinthalapati Venkata Peddi Raju & Anr. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & Ors. ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. M P V N V SASTRI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondents, in particular the 3rd respondent, in trying to interfere with the petitioners’ possession and enjoyment over the land admeasuring Ac.7.00 cents in Survey No.38 of Chebrolu village, Ungutur Mandal, 2 CGR, J. W.P. No.12015 of 2011 West Godavari District, without issuing any notice, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. 2. Petitioners claim that they are the absolute owners of the land admeasuring Ac.7.00 cents out of Ac.12.49 cents in Survey No.38 of Chebrolu village, Ungutur Mandal, West Godavari District, which they have inherited from their ancestors and that they have been in possession and enjoyment of the same for more than 7 to 8 decades. They claim that the said land is being cultivated and their names have been recorded in the revenue records such as Adangals and Pahanies maintained with the 3rd respondent since the year 1990 and that they have been paying taxes to the Government. That being so, on 15.04.2011 the 3rd respondent tried to stop the petitioners from entering the land and tried to dispossess them without issuing any prior notice or assigning any reasons. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition. 3. The petitioners in the writ petition also stated that the total extent of land in Survey No.38 of Chebrolu village, Ungutur Mandal, was about Ac.12.49 cents, of which, a part of the land has been put to use for construction of electric sub-station and part of it is occupied by private individuals and that the petitioners are in possession and 3 CGR, J. W.P. No.12015 of 2011 enjoyment to an extent of Ac.7.00 cents, the respondents have no right and authority to interfere with their possession. In support of the same, the petitioners had filed the Adangals for the Faslis 1401, 1402, 1406, 1410, 1415 and 1419 and tax receipts for the Faslis 1405 and 1420. 4. The 3rd respondent filed counter-affidavit, inter alia, stating that land in Survey No.38 admeasuring Ac.12.49 cents has been classified in village accounts as tank poramboke and on the ground that there does not exist any tank to use. Part of the said land has already been put to use for establishing electric sub-station, GAIL pipeline, road and part of it is under encroachment of washer men using as Rajaka tank and that an extent of Ac.7.82 cents remaining is vacant. Part of the said land to an extent of Ac.2.00 was identified by the Government for allotting to Social Welfare Department for construction of integrated welfare hostel complex. Therefore, the 3rd respondent had submitted alienation proposals to the 2nd respondent for transfer of the land for the aforesaid purpose and even the remaining extent of land has also been proposed for construction of Government I.T.I. College and proposals in that regard were submitted to the 2nd respondent for seeking necessary permission and approval and also for conversion of tank poramboke to village 4 CGR, J. W.P. No.12015 of 2011 site. In effect, the sum and substance of the counter-affidavit indicates that the land is tank poramboke, it vests with the Government, and that the petitioners have no title and right over the said land. 5. This Court, while issuing notice before admission, directed the parties to maintain status quo existing as on that day and the said order has been extended later on until further orders. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the subject land has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners since 7 to 8 decades and that they are cultivating the same, in support of which, he has drawn the attention of the Court to the copies of Adangals and also tax receipts as mentioned above. 8. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would contend that the subject land is classified as tank poramboke and that the Government is the custodian of the same and that the petitioners have no right and title over the same. 5 CGR, J. W.P. No.12015 of 2011 She also contends that the petitioners are not in possession of the said land and in fact, the 3rd respondent has already sent proposals for utilizing the said land for public purposes by obtaining necessary permission for conversion of the land from tank poramboke to village site. 9. Perused the record and considered the rival submissions. 10. As this Court has directed status quo to be maintained way back on 26.04.2011, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms. 11. As the petitioners claim title to the property and assert that they are in possession of the same, which is being disputed by the respondents, which cannot be gone into these proceedings, if the petitioners are found to be in possession, the respondents are directed to initiate appropriate steps if they so desire by issuing necessary notice to the petitioners and after considering the objections to be submitted by the petitioners, they can proceed with further action in the matter by following due process of law. 12. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. 6 CGR, J. W.P. No.12015 of 2011 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date:22.01.2025. cs