IMPORTANT POINT
The finality of judgments and decrees, and the ineffectiveness of attempts to challenge them, was a central legal principle established in the judgment.

JUDGMENT

1. The land, which is the subject matter of these three Writ Petitions, is one and the same and as such, all these three matters were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Writ Petition No.22742 of 2013 was filed questioning the orders passed by respondent No.2 in proceedings No.P3/617/2010, dtd. 17/6/2013, purported to be in exercise of the revisional power under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act, 1923').

3. Writ Petition No.5405 of 2014 was filed questioning the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 therein in conducting the re-survey of the subject land and attempting to dispossess the petitioner.

4. Writ Petition No.3014 of 2017 was filed aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent-Police in not providing Police Protection for implementation of the orders passed in O.S.No.59 of 1968, O.S.No.1788 of 2010 and certain other orders passed by this Court.

5. The brief and undisputed facts that are relevant for disposal of these Writ Petitions are as under:- The father of the petitioner originally filed O.S.No.31 of 1965, which was renumbered as O.S.No.59 of 1968 on the file of the Court of the Munsif Magistrate, Hyderabad East and North, seeking declaration of title against the Government represented by the District Collector, Hyderabad District. The said suit was decreed by a judgment and decree, dtd. 31/7/1976. The operative portion of the decree, reads as under:-

"That the plaintiff is hereby declared as owner and possessor of the suit land bearing Survey No.242 to the extent of 8 acres, situated at Kandikal Village, Uppuguda Taluq, East Hyderabad District bounded on north by Road, South by S.No.262, East by land of Rayulu and West by Path and agricultural land and the plaintiff is entitled to assignment of the same as per rules and further the deft is not entitled to evict the plaintiff from the above suit land."

6. Though an appeal was filed against the above judgment and decree, dtd. 31/7/1976, along with an application seeking condonation of delay, the said condone delay application was dismissed resulting in dismissal of the appeal as well on 18/8/1979. Aggrieved thereby, the Government filed a C.R.P.No.1559 of 1981 before this Court and the same was also dismissed by this Court on 12/6/1981.

7. Thereafter, the Government filed O.S.No.168 of 1991, seeking cancellation of judgment and decree in O.S.No.59 of 1968 and the said suit was dismissed for default on 28/11/1997. During pendency of O.S.No.168 of 1991, the petitioner herein and his brothers filed O.S.No.4619 of 1992 seeking perpetual injunction against the respondent-authorities and the same was dismissed by a judgment and decree, dtd. 27/10/1997. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner and his brothers filed A.S.No.402 of 1997 and the same was allowed by the appellate Court by a judgment and decree, dtd. 6/4/2000.

8. While matters stood thus, the respondent-Government filed L.G.C. No.20 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the Special Court under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for short 'the Act, 1982') against the petitioner herein, his three brothers and sixteen others alleging that they have grabbed the land admeasuring Acs.14.22 gts., in Sy.No.242 of Kandikal Village and out of the said total extent of Acs.14.22 gts., the petitioner and his brothers were alleged to have grabbed an extent of Acs.8.00 gts. The said Special Court having taken note of the judgment and decrees, passed in O.S.No.59 of 1968 and O.S.No.168 of 1991, dismissed the said L.G.C. No.20 of 1998, by an order, dtd. 18/11/2003. The W.P.M.P.No.22451 of 2008 and W.P.SR.No.84261 of 2008 filed thereagainst were also dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court by an order, dtd. 11/8/2008.

9. The orders passed by the Civil Court in O.S.No.59 of 1968, O.S.No.168 of 1991 and the orders passed by the Special Court under the Act, 1982, in L.G.C. No.20 of 1998 and the findings rendered therein have bec