WP/27917/2005 of Smt. yaramala Krishnaveni, Vs The Dist Collector, on 29 December 2005

ORDER:

WRIT PETITION NO.27917 OF 2005

The petitioner is in occupation of small extent of land in S.No.3 of BrahmanapalliVillage, Wyra Mandal, Khammam District, where she allegedly residing with herchildren by constructing a house bearing H.No.5-216. She alleges that even thoughthe higher authorities directed the second respondent to regularize her possession,the same was not done. But, the second respondent initiated action under A.P. LandEncroachment Act, 1905 (for short, the Act), issued notice under Section 7, and afterobtaining explanation dt.6.9.2005 from the petitioner passed orders on 17.12.2005directing eviction of the petitioners from the encroachment of Government land inS.No.3 of Brahmanapalli Village. In the impugned order, the second respondentheld that the petitioner is not eligible for grant of house-site patta, that encroachment by her is objectionable and that it is not possible to regularize the occupation as perRules in force.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant GovernmentPleader for Revenue (General).

It is strenuously contended that as the petitioner’s property submerged inWyra Irrigation Project, the petitioner with her family migrated to Brahmanapalli andraised a house on the Government land, which was directed to be regularized in1983, in vain. Therefore, the occupation by the petitioner cannot be anyobjectionable and she is entitled for regularization of the occupation. This is refutedby the learned Assistant Government Pleader, who submits that the petitioner haseffective alternative remedy by way of appeal to Revenue Divisional Officer underSection 10 of the Act. This is not denied by learned counsel for the petitioner. Asthere is effective remedy under Statute, this Court is not inclined to entertain the WritPetition especially when the Mandal Revenue Officer issued a notice and passedorders under Section 6 of the Act.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the right of the petitioner toseek regularization, the Writ Petition is dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner tofile appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Khammam, within a period of tendays from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As and when such appeal isfiled, the Revenue Divisional Officer shall forthwith pass orders on the application forstay that may be filed by the petitioner.

The Writ Petition with the above observations and directions is accordinglydismissed.

_______________

(V.V.S.RAO, J)29.12.2005

bnr

Note:Issue CC by 2.1.2006.

(B.O)bnr