Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 793 (TS)

Vallala Rajeshwar Rao v. State Of Telangana

2020-11-18

SHAMEEM AKTHER

body2020
JUDGMENT Shameem Akther, J. - This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner, wherein the following prayer is made: "...to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents particularly respondent Nos.3 and 4 in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring 456 sq.yds. Situated at Plot No.9, Ward No.14, Block No.2, Ramavaram Village, Kothagudem District, without notice and due process of law, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.3 and 4 not to interfere in the peaceful possession and enjoyment of land admeasuring 456 sq. yds. in Plot No.9, Ward No.14, Block No.2, Ramavaram Village, Kothagudem District, and pass such other order or orders..." 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the father of the petitioner purchased open land admeasuring 456 square yards situated at Plot No.9, Ward No.14, Block No.2, Ramavaram Village, Kothagudem Disrtrict, on 16.04.1986, by way of registered sale deed vide Doc.No.250/1986, from one Chakkardhar Rao. Since the date of purchase, the petitioner and his father are in possession of the subject land. The name of the father of the petitioner was also recorded in the revenue records in respect of the subject land. After the demise of his father, the petitioner constructed a small shed with asbestos sheets in the subject land and the Gram Panchayat also allotted H.No.4-3/9/1 and collected House Tax of Rs.135/- on 15.07.2019. While so, the respondent authorities, without giving notice or following due process of law, demolished the shed constructed by the petitioner and trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land which is illegal, arbitrary and ultimately sought a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject land. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing the respondent Nos.2 to 4 would contend that the subject land is part and parcel of land in Survey No.151, which is forest land. The total extent of land in said Survey No.151 is 1666 acres, which is notified as scheduled area. The petitioner is a non-tribal and he has no right to purchase the subject land. The total extent of land in said Survey No.151 is 1666 acres, which is notified as scheduled area. The petitioner is a non-tribal and he has no right to purchase the subject land. The learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare representing the respondent No.1 submitted that the authorities concerned are contemplating to remove the encroachments in the forest land by following due process of law. 5. Under these circumstances, the respondents shall not dispossess the petitioner from the subject land without following due process of law. It is made clear that this order will not prevent the respondents to remove the encroachments in the subject land by following due process of law, provided it is forest land. 6. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 7. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.