WP/24644/2006 of Smt. Shaheda Sultana W/o K.M. Abdul Khadar Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampalli mandal, on 26 December 2006

ORDER:

The petitioners, who are forty in number, filed instant writ petitionseeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents,namely, the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO), Serilingampally, the ViceChairman-cum-Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh IndustrialInfrastructure Corporation Limited (APIIC), Hyderabad, and theCollector, Ranga Reddy District, in allegedly trying to dispossess themwithout due process of law under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, asillegal, arbitrary and violative of their rights under Articles 19, 21 and300-A of the Constitution of India. It is their case that all of thempurchased various plots in the land comprised in various surveynumbers situated at Gopanpally Village of Serilingampally Mandal inRanga Reddy District under various registered sale deeds/agreements-cum-GPAs executed by their vendors. They also allege that they are inpeaceful possession and occupation of the land. They further allegethat they, having come to know that the Government has allotted theland to APIIC, made a representation on 13.03.2006 to the DistrictCollector, Ranga Reddy District, which is under consideration. But on12.11.2006, the officials of APIIC and Revenue Department startedlevelling the land and also made attempts to dispossess the petitioners. The matter was initially heard on 27.11.2006. At the request madeby the learned standing counsel for APIIC and the learned AssistantGovernment Pleader for Revenue (General-T) the matter wasadjourned. Today after getting instructions, the learned standingcounsel for APIIC submits that the proposals for alienation of landadmeasuring Acs.148.00 cents in various survey numbers of saidVillage are pending before the Government. He also submits thatpending the decision on the alienation proposals, the RevenueDepartment has handed over said land to APIIC on 28.10.2004 and outof said land an extent of Acs.100.00 was allotted and handed over byAPIIC to M/s Wipro limited, Hyderabad, on 26.03.2006, who are inpossession of said land. In view of this it becomes clear that there is adispute regarding title to the land allotted by APIIC to M/s Wipro limited. If so advised, the petitioners may have to adjudicate their rights in acommon Law Court. Writ petition is not proper remedy. In this writpetition no relief can be granted.

The writ petition, with the above observations, is accordinglydismissed. No costs.

_____________

(V.V.S.RAO, J)

26[th] December, 2006ghn1