Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 668 (TS)

Namburi Mukherjee Victor v. State of Telangana

2025-05-14

J.SREENIVAS RAO

body2025
ORDER : 1. This writ petition is filed for the following relief: “to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the Respondents Nos. 3 to 6 in frequently interfering and trying to dispossess the petitioners from their agricultural lands in Sy.Nos.222/A/AA/6, to an extent of Ac.5-00 gts, in Sy.No.222/s/s/1 to an extent of Ac.5-00gts, in Sy.No.222/A/AA/5 to an extent of Ac.5-00 gts, total admeasuring Ac.15-00 gts, situated at Erragunta Revenue Village, Vemsoor Mandal, Khammam District, under the guise of Survey, as illegal, arbitrary in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India, against the provisions of Surveys, settlements in Land Records and in violation of principles of natural justice and against all settled principles of law and consequently direct the Respondents Nos. 3 to 6 not to interfere and not to dispossess the petitioners from their agriculture lands in Sy.Nos.222/A/AA/6, to an extent of Ac.5-00 gts, in Sy.No.222/A/AA/1, to an extent of Ac.5- 00gts, in Sy.No.222/A/AA/5, to an extent of Ac.5-00 gts, total admeasuring Ac.15-00 gts situated at Yerragunta Revenue Village, Vemsoor Mandal, Khammam District……” 2. Heard Sri Akkam Eshwar, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5. 3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners seeked to direct the respondents to consider the objections submitted by the petitioners dated 22.04.2025 and 26.04.2025 respectively to the notice issued by the respondent No.5 dated 16.04.2025. 4. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the parties and notice in respect of respondent Nos.6 and 7 is dispensed with. 5. The facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioners claimed that they are owners of the agriculture land to an extent of Ac.15-00 covered by Sy.Nos.222/A/AA/6 and 222/A/AA/5 situated at Erragunta Revenue Village, Vemsoor Mandal, Khammam District. The petitioners dug the bore well for cultivating the seasonal crops apart from eucalyptus, teak and red sandal trees, their names were mutated in the revenue records and also they are receiving Rythu Bhandhu/Rythu Bharosa. 6. The petitioners dug the bore well for cultivating the seasonal crops apart from eucalyptus, teak and red sandal trees, their names were mutated in the revenue records and also they are receiving Rythu Bhandhu/Rythu Bharosa. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents authorities have already conducted the survey in the year 2018 as well as in the year 2024 and fixed the boundaries by way of panchanama dated 24.07.2024 and the same has become final at the instance of respondent No.7, respondent No.4 entertained the F-line application for fixing the boundary and the same is not permissible under law. Under the guise of survey at the instance of the unofficial respondent, respondent Nos.4 and 5 trying to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property and the same is gross violation of principles of natural justice. 7. Per Contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that the writ petition filed by the petitioners is not maintainable under law. The petitioners have not questioned the survey notice issued by the respondent No.5 dated 16.04.2025 and 07.05.2025, hence the writ petition is not maintainable under law. 8. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that there are disputes between the petitioners and respondent Nos.6 and 7 in respect of the property covered by Sy.No.222 situated at Erragunta Revenue Village, Vemsoor Mandal, Khammam District. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, pursuant to the notice issued by the respondent No.5 dated 16.04.2025 proposing to conduct survey on 28.04.2025, the petitioners have submitted objections on 22.04.2025 and 26.04.2025 respectively. However, respondent Nos.4 and 5 without passing any order on the said objections, respondent No.5 issued another notice dated 05.05.2025 proposing to conduct survey on 08.05.2025 and the same is gross violation of principles of natural justice. 9. The main ground raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the respondent Nos.4 and 5 have already conducted survey in respect of the very same property covered in Sy.No.222/part through panchanama dated 24.07.2024 and the same has become final and the respondent Nos.4 and 5 are not having any authority to conduct survey once again basing on the F-line application submitted by respondent No.7. 10. 10. The record discloses that the objections submitted by the petitioners dated 22.04.2025 and 26.04.2025 pursuant to the notice dated 16.04.2025 issued by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 are pending for consideration before respondent No.4. Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances, it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent No.4 to consider the objections filed by the petitioners dated 22.04.2025 and 26.04.2025 respectively pursuant to the notice dated 16.04.2025 issued by the respondent No.5 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, after giving opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners as well as respondent Nos.6 and 7 and thereafter proceeded further. Till such time, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps in respect of the subject property of the petitioners covered under the notice dated 16.04.2025. 11. With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.