HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.26880 of 2008 Date : 20-01-2014 Between:
Smt.Gundala Balamma w/o Gundala Sattaiah Aged about 45 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o H.No.5-164, Konda Mallepalli Village, Devarakonda Mandal, Nalgonda District.
… Petitioner and The Gram Panchayat, Konda Mallepally, Devarakonda Mandal, Nalgonda District, Represented by its Panchayat Secretary and another.
… Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.26880 of 2008 ORDER:
Calling in question the action of the first respondent/Gram Panchayat in not taking steps for removal of road encroachment alleged to have been made by the unofficial second respondent herein on the Southeast side of the house of the petitioner herein as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. The case of the petitioner herein, as per the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is, as infra.
3. Petitioner herein purchased the plot admeasuring 80 Sq.Yds from one Pasunuru Pedda Gopaiah in the year 1982 and constructed a house with two rooms after obtaining permission from the first respondent/Gram Panchayat and paying the house tax and other taxes to the first respondent/Gram Panchayat regularly without any arrears. As per the permission and as per the layout of the Gram Panchayat there is a 9 feet road in front of her house. The unofficial second respondent herein encroached upon the road on the Southern side of the petitioner’s site and erected temporary structures thereby obstructing the public road and causing inconvenience to the petitioner. Second respondent also encroached upon the place of public water tank and dumping huge garbage and waste materials on the road and converting the entire area as a slum. Petitioner submitted a representation to the first respondent on 07.07.2007 and in spite of receipt of the same, the first respondent failed to take any action for removal of the encroachments made by the second respondent.
4. Pleading in the manner indicated supra and seeking a direction to the first respondent/Gram Panchayat for taking steps for removal of the road encroachments alleged to have been made by the unofficial second respondent herein, the present writ petition has been filed.
5. A counter affidavit is filed by the first respondent herein stating inter alia that it is not true to say that the petitioner obtained permission from the Gram Panchayat for construction of house. The said counter further states that the petitioner is paying house tax from the year 1998 onwards and as per the Gram Panchayat records there is no layout in the area and in the absence of a layout, the question of road of 9 feet width in front of petitioner’s house does not arise.
It is further stated in the counter affidavit that as per the enquiry made by the Gram Panchayat there is no road in front of the petitioner’s house and the unofficial second respondent herein is the owner of Southeastern side plot of the petitioner’s house. The counter further states that the Gram Panchayat after receipt of representation of the petitioner, cleared the area immediately and there is no dumping of garbage at that place and there is no public water tank in the area. It is further stated in the counter that in order to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and the unofficial second respondent herein, a request was made to the unofficial second respondent herein to leave 3 ½ feet lane for ingress and egress of the petitioner to approach the internal road of the Gram Panchayat and to the said effect the unofficial second respondent herein has agreed and given consent to the Gram Panchayat on 18.10.2013 saying that 3 ½ feet road is left to the Gram Panchayat for public purpose. It is stated in the counter that even though there is no public road available to the writ petitioner’s house, the Gram Panchayat and village elders had taken all possible steps and the unofficial second respondent herein also cooperated and in the said 3 ½ feet lane petitioner has laid a concrete road in the land of the unofficial second respondent herein.
Pleading in the manner indicated supra, it is prayed by the first respondent Gram Panchayat to dismiss the writ petition.
6. Heard Sri G.Venkateshwarlu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Raghavendra Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent/Gram Panchayat and Sri M.Venkatram Reddy for the unofficial second respondent.
7. Having regard to the events which have taken place subsequent to the filing of the writ petition and in view of the amicable settlement of the issue in between the petitioner and the unofficial second respondent herein with the mediation of the Gram Panchayat authorities, this Court deems it apposite to close the present writ petition and the writ petition is accordingly closed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
A.V.SESHA SAI, J Date:20.01.2014 grk HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.26880 of 2008 Date : 20-01-2014 grk