HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.18889 of 2007
Date: October 07, 2014
Between:
1. Khaja Rizwan Sharieff & another.
… Petitioners And
1. The District Collector, Warangal District, Warangal & 3 others.
… Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.18889 of 2007
O R D E R:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent.
2. The first petitioner purchased an extent of Ac.5.30 cents of agricultural land under registered sale deed dated 17.12.1980. The 2nd petitioner also purchased another extent of Ac.5.00 cents under registered sale deed dated 17.12.1980. They approached the 4th respondent, who issued a No Objection Certificate stating that the said lands are agricultural lands and they are not attracted by the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act’). While so, the 4th respondent issued a notice on 26.10.1987 under Section 8 (3) of the Act serving a draft statement prepared under Section 8 of the Act and sought objections from the petitioners. The petitioners submitted their objections. The 4th respondent passed orders on 26.05.1988 and 25.05.1988 declaring the petitioners as non-surplus landholders. The names of the petitioners were recorded in the revenue records also. They were also issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in the year 1991. They dug a bore well in their lands in the year 1985 and obtained electricity connection in the year 1989. After obtaining permission from the Gram Panchayat, Kamatipally, Hanamkonda Mandal, Warangal District, on 22.09.1989, they constructed a shed and two rooms for the purpose of residence of servants. While so, the officers of the 2nd respondent came to the land on 30.08.2007 and tried to level the land without issuing any notice for the purpose of construction of houses for weaker section people on the ground that the first respondent allotted the said land to the 2nd respondent. In those circumstances, the present writ petition was filed challenging the action of the 2nd respondent.
3. The 2nd respondent filed a counter-affidavit stating that they never entered into the land of the petitioners nor tried to demolish any structures. When there is no intention to take over the said lands, invocation of Land Acquisition Act does not arise at all. As per the sanctioned Master Plan the area is earmarked for residential purpose and if the petitioners want to make any construction, they have to obtain permission for layout and thereafter only they have to make construction.
4. In view of the categorical statement made by the 2nd respondent that they are not interfering with the land of the petitioners, nothing survives for adjudication in the present writ petition and the writ petition is accordingly closed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed in consequence. No costs.
A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: October 07, 2014 BSB 8 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.18889 of 2007
Date: October 07, 2014
BSB