IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI
WRIT APPEAL No.524 of 2021
(Hybrid Hearing Through video conferencing)
Kamar Jahan Begum,
W/o. Late Mehboob Subhani Khan,
Aged 60 years, R/o. Kaikaluru Canal Road,
Kaikaluru Village & Mandal, Krishna District,
and others. .. Appellants
Versus
Gandrala Jamalaiah S/o. Moshe,
Aged 51 years, Occ: Journalist,
R/o. 3-59/1, Danagudem Road,
Kaikaluru Village, Krishna District,
and others.
.. Respondents
Counsel for the appellants : Mr. D.V. Sasidhar
Counsel for respondents 1 to 3 : Mr. K.V. Aditya Chowdary
Counsel for respondents 4 to 6 : GP for Revenue
ORAL JUDGMENT
Dt: 26.10.2021
(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)
Aggrieved by the order dated 01.07.2021 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.5667 of 2021, the appellants preferred the present appeal.
2. The aforesaid writ petition was filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein seeking a direction to the authorities to deliver possession of plots bearing Nos.27, 29 and 30 in R.S.No.441 of Kaikaluru Village and Mandal, Krishna District, which were stated to have been allotted to them. Taking note of the 2 HCJ & AVSS,J W.A.No.524 of 2021 submission made by the learned Government Pleader for Revenue that steps were being taken for delivery of possession of the said plots and that there were certain encroachments over the said plots, for removal of which appropriate action was proposed, the learned single Judge, by the order under appeal, directed the Tahsildar, Kaikaluru Mandal, to remove the encroachments and deliver the possession of the property in accordance with law.
3. Aggrieved by the said direction, the appellants, who were third parties to the writ petition, preferred this writ appeal by seeking leave to appeal, which was granted vide order dated 18.08.2021. It is the case of the appellants that they have been in possession of the subject plots since long time and that they have submitted representations for regularization of their possession and without considering their representations, the subject plots were allotted in favour of the writ petitioners. It is also their case that they have earlier filed W.P.No.3713 of 2020 before this Court, challenging the action of the authorities in interfering with their possession of the subject plots pending consideration of their representations for regularization and the said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 18.02.2020, directing the authorities to dispose of their representations.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record.
5. It is to be noted that the subject plots, which are stated to have been encroached upon by the appellants, were allotted to the writ petitioners by the Government and when possession of the subject plots was not handed over to the writ petitioners, they filed the writ petition in which a direction for delivery of possession was issued. If the appellants claim that they are entitled for regularization of their occupation of the subject plots, they have 3 HCJ & AVSS,J W.A.No.524 of 2021 to take recourse to appropriate remedy in that regard and their claim cannot be adjudicated in this appeal arising out of an order passed in the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned single Judge. However, we observe that the authorities shall follow the procedure prescribed under law in removing the encroachments over the subject plots.
6. With the above observation, the writ appeal stands disposed of. Status quo order granted on 26.08.2021 shall stand vacated. No costs. pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ A.V. SESHA SAI, J
IBL