HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.2200 of 2007
Date: October 13, 2014
Between:
K. Ramakrishna Raju.
… Petitioner And
1. The State of A.P., rep. by the Special Chief Secretary, Revenue (Asn.V) Dept, Hyderabad & 3 others.
… Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.2200 of 2007
O R D E R:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondents 2 and 3 and learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 4.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that one Smt. Pulagam Saradamba purchased Plot No.154 B admeasuring 93.35 square yards and Plot Nos.154 and 155 admeasuring 533.33 square yards forming part of Survey No.260 of Nacharam Village of the erstwhile Hayatnagar Taluk, Ranga Reddy District, from one Smt. Valiunnisa Begum and 7 others under registered sale deeds dated 07.09.1983 and 02.07.1981 respectively. Similarly, one Smt. Boppanna Budhimathi purchased Plot No.156 admeasuring 266.66 square yards in the same Survey No.260 under Karthikeya Nagar layout of Nacharam Village. The said layout was approved by the Gram Panchayat in the year 1981. It was approved by the Urban Development Authority in the year 1989. The petitioner entered into an agreement of sale-cum-General Power of Attorney on 22.01.1989 with the above said purchasers in order to construct a residential complex. The then Mandal Revenue Officer, Uppal Mandal, R.R. District, issued a No Objection Certificate on 02.09.2002 in respect of Plot No.154/B admeasuring 93.35 square yards stating that the land which forms part of Survey No.260 does not belong to the Government. The 2nd respondent granted approval for construction of a residential complex by letter dated 06.08.2004 and passed an order on the same day directing the petitioner to approach concerned authorities for sanction of plan. When the petitioner approached the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent sanctioned building plan on 06.08.2004 itself. Thereafter, the petitioner started construction of five storeyed residential complex and at that stage the Revenue Authorities started interfering stating that part of the said land falls within Survey No.248 which is a Government land. A notice was issued under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short ‘the Act’), and the petitioner challenged the same in W.P.No.14742 of 2005. He withdrew the said writ petition later on and submitted his explanation on 14.07.2005. The 4th respondent passed an order under Section 6 of the Act on 20.07.2005 holding that the land on which construction was being undertaken is a Government land and directed the petitioner to vacate the same within 24 hours. The petitioner filed W.P.No.16022 of 2005 which was disposed of on 22.08.2005 directing the petitioner to file an appeal before the Statutory Authorities. The petitioner filed an appeal and the same was dismissed on 19.11.2005. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred a Revision under Section 12 (A) of the Act before the Government and the same is pending. In the meanwhile, the 2nd respondent passed order dated 25.11.2006 withdrawing and cancelling the technical approval issued earlier for residential building. Challenging the same, the present writ petition was filed.
3. The 4th respondent filed a counter-affidavit stating that the total extent of 893.33 square yards is identified on ground having fallen in Survey No.248 of Nacharam Village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. As per ‘khasra pahani’ for the year 1954- 1955 the land in Survey No.248 admeasuring Ac.9.28 guntas of Nacharam Village is recorded as ‘poramboke sarkari’ and it continued to be the same till 2012-2013. The respondents noticed some encroachments in the said Government land and hence the Special Grade Deputy Collector (L.P), Ranga Reddy District, and on his instructions, the Surveyor (L.P) demarcated the land in Survey No.248 of Nacharam Village with the help of layout plan of surrounding Survey No.248 and noticed that some illegal encroachments have come up in the said land. It was also noticed that some apartments were constructed in Plot Nos.154/P, 155/P, 156/P and 154/P and the Special Grade Deputy Collector (LP), Collectorate, Ranga Reddy District, directed the then Tahsildar, Uppal Mandal, to demolish the structures. At that stage, the proceedings under the Act have been taken up. Though a No Objection Certificate was granted in respect of the land in Survey No.260, the petitioner tried to encroach/grab into Government land in an extent of 332 square yards in Survey No.248 of Nacharam Village which is classified as ‘poramboke sarkari’.
4. When this Court, by order dated 22.07.2014, directed the 4th respondent to file a counter-affidavit indicating the actual position and also specifying whether Karthikeya Nagar Society is situated in Survey No.260 or 248, the Mandal Surveyor was directed by him to identify the disputed land and he submitted a report on 06.08.2014 stating that the disputed land in Plot Nos.154, 154/B, 155 and 156 fell in Survey No.248 of Nacharam Village.
5. In view of the above averments, it is clear that the land in Plot Nos.154, 154/B, 155 and 156 is in Survey No.248 and it is claimed by the Government as Government land. The petitioner states that he obtained layout permission from the 2nd respondent which is now withdrawn and cancelled by the 2nd respondent by the impugned proceedings dated 25.11.2006. In view of the pendency of Revision preferred by the petitioner under the provisions of the Act before the Government, it cannot be held that the land claimed by the petitioner falls within Survey No.248 or 260 till the claim of the Government is settled in the Revision or any other proceedings. The location of the land claimed by the petitioner cannot be decided in the present proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As on today there is a dispute with regard to land claimed by the petitioner and till that dispute is settled, it cannot be held that the order passed by the 2nd respondent on 25.11.2006 is bad.
6. In the circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed, however, giving liberty to the petitioner to submit an appropriate application to respondents 2 and 3 as and when the Revision under the provisions of A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905, is disposed of by the Government. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed in consequence. No costs.
A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: October 13, 2014 BSB 3 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.2200 of 2007
Date: October 13, 2014
BSB