ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent.

2. No representation for the 2nd respondent, though the counter affidavit was filed on 12.02.2014 itself.

3. This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the respondents in proposing to evict the petitioner by demolishing the House No.18-12-2/4 situated in 9th Lane, Nehrunagar, Ward No.50, Guntur District without following the due process of law.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the house bearing H.No.8-

12-2/3 with Municipal Assessment No.16825/F situated at 9th Lane, Nehrunagar, Guntur Town. The said house was constructed within 54 Sq. Yards of the land and the said piece of the house site is part of the land in an extent of 1023 Sq. Yards which was owned by Smt. Siddabattuni Komalangamma. A tiled house with two rooms bearing D.No.8-12-2/3 with Assessment No.16825/F has been in existence in an extent of 54 Sq. Yards of the land as stated above. After the death of Smt. Komalangamma, the land was devolved on Siddabathuni Masthan Rao and he sold away the said house to Sri V. Tirupathi Venkaiah for consideration on 20.04.1982. Sri Venkaiah in turn, sold away to Sri Kandlakunta Narayana on 29.01.1994. Sri Narayana in turn sold away to Karamsetty Venkateswarlu and his wife Eswaramma on 12.07.1996. The said two vendees in turn sold away to Kunchela Devi W/o.Venkata Reddy on 24.02.2000. Smt. K. Devi in turn, sold away to Smt. Pittu Vani W/o.Krishna Reddy on 03.07.2004. Smt. Vani, in turn, sold away to Smt. Devara Usha Phani Bala, W/o.Naresh on 15.04.2005. Smt. Phani Bala, in turn, sold away to Gudipalli Vijay, S/o.Sambasiva Rao on 28.11.2006. Sri Vijay, in turn, sold away to the petitioner’s husband on 28.04.2011, who in turn executed relinquishment deed in favour of the petitioner on 08.11.2011. The District Collector through his proceedings dated 18.08.2011 sanctioned financial assistance under Indiramma Housing Scheme for construction of houses. Since it was in dilapidated condition, the petitioner constructed a small residential house in the said 54 Sq. Yards of land with the financial assistance granted by the District Collector and she has been residing in the said house. The 1st respondent-Corporation is threatening to demolish the house of the petitioner alleging that it was constructed without obtaining permission from the Corporation. On enquiry, she came to know that at the instance of the 2nd respondent Sathram (Trust), the 1st respondent is contemplating to proceed with the demolition of the house. The petitioner has been paying the property tax to the Municipality. Since the land is in an extent of 54 Sq. Yards, there is no necessity to obtain permission for demolition of earlier dilapidated house for the purpose of construction of new house. The 2nd respondent –Trust is nothing to do with the house. They cannot suddenly claim that, the said house property was endowed to them and the petitioner is an encroacher.

5. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-Corporation submits that, we are not interfering with the subject house property of the petitioner bearing D.No.8-12-2/3 with Assessment No.16825/F situated at 9th Lane, Nehrunagar, Guntur Town. In case, if it is required for any public purpose, the 1st respondent authority will follow the due procedure.

6. However, the 2nd respondent filed counter affidavit and states that, the 2nd respondent herein filed eviction case against Sri Pittu Krishna Reddy in O.A.No.27/2005 from whose wife the present petitioner is claiming the title as one of the predecessor in title. The subject site in O.A is house No.18-12-2/4 situated in 9th Lane, Nehrunagar, Ward No.50, the 2nd respondent got filed the will executed by late Komalangamma in the eviction case which was marked as Ex.P1. The said Pittu Krishna Reddy along with other encroachers themselves put a common represe