Judgment The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, in the year 2001. With a view to establish a Home for aged, disabled destitute and women of Hindupur, Madakasira, Chilmathur and Pargi Mandals, it purchased an extent of Ac.3.18 cents of land in Sy.No.457-IC of Srikantapuram Village of Hindupur Mandal, through a sale deed dated 15-07-2010. The purchase was preceded by a ‘No Objection Certificate’ issued by the District Collector, Anantapur, the 1st respondent herein, on 22-10-2008. The petitioner submits that in the immediate neighbourhood of its land, there exists Government land in Sy.No.458-2, admeasuring Ac.4.97 cents, and that the same has been allotted for providing house sites to the eligible poor, in the recent past. The petitioner contends that some persons and leaders in the locality, who did not relish the coming into existence of a home for the aged, disabled and destitute persons, submitted a complaint dated 19-05-2010, to the 1st respondent, alleging that house site pattas in the Government land were made to ineligible persons, and the land in Sy.No.457-1C was encroached. The 1st respondent is said to have called for a report from the Tahsildar, Hindupur Mandal, the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent issued a notice dated 10-06-2012 to the petitioner, stating that one, Sri V. Paramesappa of Hindupur submitted a representation to the 1st respondent, alleging that Ac.3.18 cents of land in Sy.No.457-IC of Srikantapuram Village was encroached by the petitioner; proceedings are pending in the High Court, and that since the 1st respondent directed enquiry into the matter, no further activity can be taken up over the land. The petitioner challenges the said notice. It is stated that the construction of rehabilitation centre for the aged, disabled and destitute has progressed to a substantial extent, and material worth Rs.4 lakhs is lying over the land. It is also pleaded that Paramesappa, a retired Head Master, has the habit of harassing the people in the locality, and that there is no basis for the impugned orders. Since reference was made to a writ petition filed by Paramesappa, being W.P.No.34099 of 2011, extensive arguments submitted by the learned counsel for the parties were heard. The petitioner organization was registered with a noble objective of helping the aged, disabled and destitute persons, particularly from women. Since reference was made to a writ petition filed by Paramesappa, being W.P.No.34099 of 2011, extensive arguments submitted by the learned counsel for the parties were heard. The petitioner organization was registered with a noble objective of helping the aged, disabled and destitute persons, particularly from women. Normally, any citizen, who comes in contact with such an organization, would tend to take part in it, or to extend help. The purchase of the land made by the petitioner was preceded by a ‘No Objection Certificate’, issued by the 1st respondent. Left to themselves, none of the authorities of the Government in any department have caused any hindrance to the activities of the petitioner. As a matter of fact, the Government land ought to have been assigned to such organizations. The trouble started with the submission of a representation by Sri Paramesappa. After perusing the material placed before it, this Court summoned Sri Paramesappa. It has emerged that, being a retired Head Master, he has chosen to use his leisure time, to harass people in the locality, and the petitioner, in particular. The tone and tenor of his representation, signed by him; is totally objectionable. He stated that there is no necessity to construct any home for the aged, disabled and destitute in the locality, at all. At one stage, he was informed that the land in Sy.No.457-1C does not belong to Government. Still, he stated that the land must be divided into plots and distributed to the poor. When the same was brought to his notice, he tendered apology to the Court, and stated that he would not indulge in such activities, in future. The only basis for the impugned order was the representation submitted by Sri Paramesappa. Since that turned out to be a device, to blackmail others, and the said individual has undertaken not to continue with his blackmailing tactics, the impugned notice deserves to be set aside. Hence, the writ petition is allowed, and the notice dated 10-06-2012, issued by the 2nd respondent is set aside. The 1st respondent is directed not to act on any representation, that may be submitted by Sri Paramesappa. It is also directed that, in case the said individual submits any complaints against general public, or the petitioner, the respondents shall report the matter to the Police for initiation of prosecution, for causing nuisance. The 1st respondent is directed not to act on any representation, that may be submitted by Sri Paramesappa. It is also directed that, in case the said individual submits any complaints against general public, or the petitioner, the respondents shall report the matter to the Police for initiation of prosecution, for causing nuisance. Sri Paramesappa is also warned that, if he continues with such activities, this Court will consider the feasibility of directing stoppage of pension, being paid to him. The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petition shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.