High CourtsSingle Bench(1991) 12 AP CK 0038

Sri G. Ramu and Others vs The Collector and Others

Andhra Pradesh High Court · Decided on 31 December 1991 · Citation: (1992) 2 ALT 564

HON’BLE JUDGES
Radhakrishna Rao, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 17298/91

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 335 words

Radhakrishna Rao, J.—This writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representations for assignment or allotment of the poramboke land admeasuring 7 acres in Sy. No. 496 situated at Gooty town of Anantapur district to the petitioners and residents of new communist colony of Gooty town of Anantapur district.

2.

The main contention of the petitioners is that they are landless poor having no house facility of their own. The petitioners along with some others submitted representations to the respondents for allotment of house sites for the purpose of construction of houses in the said Sy .No. 496 which is a poramboke land. Expecting a positive response from the respondents, the petitioners and some other persons constructed houses and raised huts. Thus the petitioners have been in possession and enjoyment of the houses constructed in the said land since 1989.

3.

It is also contended that the State Government has announced several policies to provide pacca houses to the poor and weaker sections time and again. The petitioners also submitted representation to the Minister for Revenue for allotment of the said land to the petitioners. While so the local ruling party leaders with an ill-motive and with the help of respondents Nos. 3 and 4 trying to evict the petitioners from the said land.

4.

Heard both the learned counsel.

5.

In the case of unauthorised occupant where action has been taken by the Government to evict them from the poramboke lands, this Court will not give any direction under Article 226 cm the Constitution of India directing the authorities to grant pattas. The question is whether the representations of the petitioners is to be considered or not? It is for the authorities concerned to consider the representations or not. When the petitioners are unauthorised occupants the question of entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India does not arise.

6.

Accordingly the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.