Telangana High Court
WP/26370/2006 of Kalum Ganga Devi, Vs The District Collector, on 27 December 2006
SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.26370 of 2006 27.12.2006 Between: Kalum Ganga Devi, W/o.Sankuru And others … Petitioners AND The District Collector, West Godavari, Eluru And others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.26370 of 2006
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO
WRIT PETITION No.26370 of 2006
27.12.2006
Between:
Kalum Ganga Devi, W/o.Sankuru
And others
AND
The District Collector, West Godavari, Eluru And others … Petitioners … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO
WRIT PETITION No.26370 of 2006
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Petitioners 1 and 2 are residents of Pendrala village and third petitioner is residentof Pathakunkala village of Polavaram Mandal in West Godavari District. They filedthe present writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of therespondents, namely, District Collector, Eluru, Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO),Polavaram Mandal, and Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Polavaram, in pressuring thepetitioners by threat of forcible eviction of the petitioners and other persons belong toScheduled Tribe (ST) from the land in various survey numbers situated atJillellagudem, Pendrala, Kunkala villages of Polavaram Mandal, as illegal andarbitrary. They also seek consequential direction to the respondents not to evictthem.
It is the case of the petitioners that the subject land has been in possession of STsfor many years. Their possession was also recorded in the village adangals and thatafter coming into force of Schedule Areas Land Transfer Regulation no other personis registered as possessor in the subject land. They also allege that there have beenmany attempts by the non-Tribals to occupy the land and now allegedly therespondents are pressurizing the petitioners and other Tribals with Police threats toevict them.
At the stage of admission itself, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue(Assignment) has obtained instructions from the respondents. He submits thattheland in question belongs to nine non-Tribals and that they were also issuedPattadar Pass Books. The land is not Government land and the petitionersencroached upon the private land. He also submits that the respondents neverpressurized or threatened the petitioners with dispossession.
After hearing learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant GovernmentPleader, this Court is convinced that the petitioners herein are trying to seekredressal in relation to a dispute, which is purely in the realm of Private Law by resorting to Public Law remedy. If the petitioners are encroachers as alleged,squatting on the private land as rightly pointed out by the learned AssistantGovernment Pleader, respondents have no say. It is the dispute between thepetitioners and those nine non-Tribal persons. The third respondent has to interferein the matter if there is any complaint made by the private persons alleging trespass.
The writ petition is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
December 27, 2006. (V.V.S.RAO,J)
YS
_____________