ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners under Article

226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“. . . . . pleased to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly a Writ of Madamus declaring the action of 7th respondent in seeking to evict the petitioners from their shops situated in Kusarlapudi Grama Panchayat of Rolugunta mandal of Anakapalli District dt.11-07-2023 which were leased out under Lease Agreement dt.05-01- 2004 during the currency of lease period as bad illegal arbitrary and consequently set aside the notice dt.11-07-

2023 and to pass. . . . . .”

2. The short grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent- authorities are trying to evict the petitioners from the subject shops situated in Kusarlapudi Grama Panchayat, Rolugunta Mandal, Anakapalli District, which were leased out to the petitioners under the lease agreement, dated 05.01.2004, for a period of 20 years, during the subsistence of the lease period.

3. Heard Sri K. Subrahmanyam, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Sri N. Sri Hari, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayats.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, the petitioners are holding valid lease agreement dated 05.01.2004 for a period of 20 years, which is subsisting till 31.12.2023. However, the respondents are trying to evict the petitioners, high-handedly. As such, present Writ Petition is filed, praying to protect the interest of the petitioners.

5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel, on written instructions dated 25.07.2023, collectively submitted that the lease agreement said to have been entered by the petitioners is not available in the Gram Panchayat records and the copy of the agreement produced by the petitioners shows that it is entered by the lease holders with the Sarpanch in individual capacity without any resolution of Grama Panchayat or Grama Sabha. The said agreement was not registered and not written on a stamp paper and therefore, it is not a valid document in the eye of law and on the basis of the said agreement, the petitioner cannot squat on the property.

He further submitted that, according to G.O.Ms.No.496 dated

11.06.1966, if at all any lease agreement is entered, it should be registered within a period of 15 days from the date of confirmation of the such lease by the District Collector and further as per the Government Memo.No.439/Pts.III/A2/85-4, dated 28.10.1985, no leases are permitted for longer periods to avoid locking of the property in an un-remunerative leases. As lease agreement held by the petitioners is not valid, they have no legal right to squat on the property under the said agreement and therefore, no indulgence need to be shown in the case of the petitioners. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition.

6. Perused the record.

7. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are in possession of the subject shops. Whether the possession of the petitioners over the subject shops is authorized or not cannot be gone into by this Court in the present Writ Petition. As the petitioners are in possession of the property, the respondents can always take steps to evict them in accordance with law and without recourse to such procedure as per law, the respondents cannot dispossess the petitioners.

8. Considering the facts and legal position and as there is no purpose in keeping this Writ Petition pending, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition with the following direction:

“The respondent-authorities are at liberty to take steps for eviction of the petitioners in accordance with law.”

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

There shall no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

26th July, 2023.

GBS/NKA