THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.36327 of 2014 Between:
1. Jampala Alivelu and others.
PETITIONERS AND
1. The State of Telangana rep. by its Principal Secretary, revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, and others.
RESPONDENTS ORDER:
The petitioners herein sought for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent not to demolish the petitioners’ houses raised on Plot Nos.208, 209, 207, 210, 211, 188 and 189 respectively in Sy.No.636, Nalgonda Town and District, without following the due process of law.
2. The petitioners have claimed that house site pattas have been granted to them on 25.02.1999 for the land situated in Sy.No.636 in Nalgonda town. But however, on 22.11.2014, the 3rd respondent, viz., the Tahsildar, Nalgonda District, along with his staff came to the site, where the houses constructed by the petitioners are standing, with machinery and partially damaged and demolished the houses of the petitioners. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner no prior notice or intimation has been given by the Tahsildar before the partial demolition, which has been carried out by him. Thus the Tahsildar without following the due process of law has been unauthorisedly interfering with the rights of the petitioners to occupy the house sites, which were assigned to them.
3. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the State of Telangana, on instructions, submitted that the Tahsildar on his own has not made such an attempt. If any third parties interfere with the possession of the petitioners, it is open for them to approach the competent civil Court and sue the third parties. The petitioners by impleading the Tahsildar, who has not taken any action in the matter against them, cannot secure any orders from this Court.
4. In view of the contradictory statements adopted by the learned counsel appearing on either side, I can only observe as under. If any third parties, other than the public servants or public functionaries, are interfering with the right of possession and enjoyment of the house sites assigned to the petitioners, it is always open to the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court having jurisdiction to try the cases. They cannot agitate the same in this writ petition. On the other hand, if the Tahsildar is proposing to interfere with the possession of the petitioners, in any manner, Tahsildar would follow the due process and then alone interfere with the rights of the petitioners with the house sites concerned or the houses raised thereon.
5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J.
27th November, 2014 Js.