THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P. Nos. 16385, 16394 & 16580 of 2011 Date of Judgment: 12.6.2014 Between:
W.P.NO. 16385 OF 2011 P. Venkatesh …Petitioner And The Tahasildar, Ghatkesar, Ranga Reddy district and another Between:
W.P.NO. 16394 OF 2011 ..Respondents N. Vijayakumar …Petitioner And The Tahasildar, Ghatkesar, Ranga Reddy district and another Between:
W.P.NO. 16580 OF 2011 ..Respondents M. Pentaiah …Petitioner And The Tahasildar, Ghatkesar, Ranga Reddy district and another ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P. Nos. 16385, 16394 & 16580 of 2011 COMMON ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the parties. The issue involved in all these three writ petition is common and hence they are disposed of by this common order.
According to the petitioners in all these writ petitions, they are the owners and possessors of plots in Sy.Nos. 160, 161 and 194 situated at Gayathri Nagar, Boduppal village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy district. It is stated by the petitioners that the respondents were trying to dispossess them physically from the plots on the ground that a compound wall was required to be constructed over the adjacent Government land in Sy.No. 192.
In June, 2011, while issuing notice before admission, this Court directed status quo to be maintained for a period of eight weeks.
Second respondent has filed a counter-affidavit specifically stating therein that Sy.No. 192 is a Government land admeasuring 0-27 guntas which is used as a burial ground and that a survey was conducted with regard to the said land and boundaries were also marked. It is also stated that the Human Rights Commission, by its order dated 30.12.2010 in HRC No. 5583/2010, directed the Collector, Ranga Reddy district to complete the construction work with the funds of Gram Panchayat, Boduppal. It is stated that while taking up the said work, the proposed compound wall only covers Sy.No. 192. It is specifically stated in paragraph-3 of the counter-affidavit that the Gram Panchayat has no intention to encroach into the plots of the petitioners. A sketch map is also appended to the counter which shows location of Sy.No. 192 which was proposed to be covered by the compound wall and that the plots of the petitioners are adjacent to Sy.No. 192 are not part of the said survey number.
In view of the categorical averments in the counter- affidavit of the second respondent that they were not proposing to encroach into any plots of the petitioners, no further orders are necessary to be passed in these writ petitions which are accordingly disposed of.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dt. 12.6.2014 KR