WP/17711/1997 of K.Laxmareddy, Vs mandal Revenue Officer, on 22 December 2006

ORDER:

1. This writ petition has been instituted when the respondent-MandalRevenue Officer, Manuguru, started interfering with the possession of thepetitioner’s land of an extent of Ac.0-3 guntas situated in Samithisingaram village of Manuguru Mandal, Khammam District.

2. This writ petition has been instituted on 29-07-1997 and an interimdirection has been granted by this court on 1[st] August, 1997 inW.P.M.P.No.21490 of 1997 moved in this writ petition, granting interim stay ofdispossession pending further orders in the said W.P.M.P. That is how thewrit petitioner continued to be in possession of land in question. The writpetitioner has asserted that he had purchased the land in question whereon ahut was in existence in the year 1967 from one Dondeti Bhadraiah and thatever since he was living therein and to improve upon the conditions of hisliving he has removed the said hut and constructed a pucca house with thenecessary permission of the Gram Panchayat, Samithisingaram. He alsoasserts that the local Gram Panchayat has assessed the said house toproperty tax and assigned it No.13-1-271/1. Therefore, the writ petitionerasserts that the respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer, Manuguru, could nothave interfered with his lawful possession of the land in question.

3. At long last, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Manuguru, filed his counteraffidavit in the matter on 20-12-2006. It is averred at page 4 of the counteraffidavit that the land in Survey No.314 of the village is a Government landand that the writ petitioner is trying to grab the Government land byencroaching upon it. Therefore, the Mandal Revenue Officer has assertedthat a notice under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act,1905 ( hereinafter be referred to as ‘the Act’) has been served on the writpetitioner on 09-09-1997 and that the writ petitioner has not submitted hisreply thereto. It is obvious that the alleged notice under Section 7 of the Acthas been served on the writ petitioner after he has approached this court andafter this court had passed an interim order on 01-08-1997 directing therespondent not to dispossess him. Since the writ petitioner has been servedwith the notice, it is certainly open to the petitioner to place the necessarymaterial to assert his title over the piece of land in question and allow theMandal Revenue Officer to determine the nature and title of the writ petitionerover the land in question. The writ petitioner is therefore directed to place hissubmissions in response to the notice said to have been served on him underSection 7 of the Act on or before 31-01-2007 and the respondent shallconsider the same and pass a speaking order dealing with the objectionsraised by the writ petitioner asserting his title over the land in question. Tillthe enquiry contemplated by the Mandal Revenue Officer is accomplished,the status-quo with regard to the possession of the land shall continue andthe writ petitioner shall not be dispossessed in the meantime.

4. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No order as tocosts.

________________________

NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO,J

22-12-2006

Stp