One CC to SRt v. ROOPESH KUMAR REDDY

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 and 3 to process the application, dated 30.10.2024 of the petitioner with reference number 81 by granting building permission to the petitioner for an extent 180.00 Sq.mts, situated at Grama Kantam land at Bachupally Village, Kandukur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V. ROOPESH KUMAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: AGP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI K. PRADEEP REDDY, S.C. FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRT JUSTICE K'SARATH WRIT PETITIO N No.7L48 of 2025 ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: "to issue an order or direction one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No'3 in rejecting the application dated 30. 1O.2024 with reference number 8 I in respect of granting building permission to an extent of 180.00 Sq mts situated at Grama Kantam land at Bachupally Village, Kandukur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The Memo No'6442/ 2OI7-BL (Pts)-l dated 25.03.2023 of the Respondent No.2 as illegal, arbitrary and against the Principles of Natural Justice and set aside the same by consequently direct the Respondcnt Nos.2 and 3 to process the application dated 30.I0.2024 ol the petitioner with reference number 81 by granting building permission to the petitioner for an extent of 180.00 Sq mts situated at Grama Kantam land at Bachupally Village, Kandukur Mandal. Ranga Reddy District in accordance with law"'

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.3033l of 2023 dated 18.O7.2024 and, the same is not disputed by the t t learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural development and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3-Gram Panchayat' I

3. In view of the said submissions and for the reasons assigned by this Court in W.p.No.3O33i of 2023 d,ated, 18.07.2024, the Writ petition is disposed of by setting aside the impugned order and the respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to process the application fited by the petitioner dated 30. IO.2O24 for grant of building permission in respect of the subject plot i.e., 1SO.OO sq. mts situated at Grama Kantam Land at Bachupally Village, Kaldukur Mandal of Ranga Reddy District in accordance with law within two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. The Registry is directed to annex a copy of the order dated 18.O7.2024 in W.p.No.3O33I of 2023 aJong with this order.

5. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in this petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. //TRUE COPYII SD/-V.KAVITHA DEPUTY REGISTRAR I $ i ' To,

1. The principal Secretar ISECTION OFFICER secretariat Buitdings H/oi[l}T'*t Raj Depar#ent), state of retansana, l*nt"tfi:13fl6Lffio"lv Grama Panchavat, Bachuparry, Kandukur Mandar,

2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad. t 4. One CC to SRt V. ROOPESH KUMAR REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl u lg:j^9+t",:!_loJ Lllclayal Raj and Rural Devetoomenr Hidh r:^,..r r^. +,.^ / ,/ I

6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] I

7. One CC to SRI K. PRADEEP REDDY, S.C. for Gram Panchayat [OPUC] B. Two CD Copies Along with a copy of the Order dated 18.07.2024 in W.P.No'30331 of 2023. MP GJP M- I t HIGH COURT DATEID:10 tO3t2O2S P. 1l-tE S)4; o ,.-) |- I ,:,i 09 Juttt m l </ TC' 1-) { ,l ORDER WP.No.71 48 of 2O2S DISPOSING OF THE W WRIT PETITION ITHOUT COSTS 4 x' I l/ I I I sr(J THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE K.SARATTI trIRIT PETITION No.3O 331 0F 2023 ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent No.3 in rejecting the application dated 16.O8.2023 frled for the petitioner for grant of permission for construction of the building in an extent of 102.5 Sq.Yards situated in Grama Kantam Land in Bachupally village of Kandukur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and requested to direct the respondent No.2 and 3 to grant building permission to the petitioner in respect ofthe subject plot.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for panchayat Raj and Rural Development and the learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayats appearing for the respondents.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is the owner and possessor Grama Kantam land to extent of lO2.S Sq.yards situated at Bachupalli village, of Kandkur Mandal Poge 2 of 7 SK,J Ranga Reddy District having acquired the sarne through a Gift Settlement Deed dated 0g.0g.2023 executed by her mother-in-law. The petitioner with a view to construct a building in the said plot fited online application on 16.08.2023 arrd the same was rejected by the respondent No.3 on the ground that in view of ttre resolutjon passed by the Grama Sabha Meeting held on 26.06.2021, wherein it was resolved that not to give any building permissions in respect of Grama Kantam Lands and open spaces in ttre village.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would further submit that some of the similarly situated persons, who are also in possession of the part of Grama Kantam land of Bachupally village, filed W.P.No.392 of 2O08 and the sarne was allowed on 31.03.2016. Being aggrieved by the sarne, the respondent No.3 preferred the Writ Appeal No.7g4 of 2018 and the same was dismissed on Ol.Og.2O22, wherein it was held that Grama Kantam land. is not a Government land and is also not vested in Grama I { SK,J Panchayat and therefore rejecting application Iiled by the petitioner dated 76.08.2023 seeking building permission in respect of the subject plot, which is also a Grama Kantam land is arbitrar5r and illegal and requested to set aside the impugned order and to direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to process the application filed by the petitioner for grant of building perrnlsslon.

5. The leamed Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat basing on the counter filed by the respondent No.3 would submit that as a matter of a f,act the land in question is in dispute among the villagers as for the last 13 the Members of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Youth Association are trying to protect the land of Grama Kantam Land to an extent of Ac.6. 15 guntas. Further, the impugned order was passed basing resolution passed by the respondent No.3 on 26.06.202I, and there €rre no merits in the writ petition and requested to dismiss the writ petition. Pdge 4 of 7 slr,J

6. After hearing both sides and on perusing the record, this Court is of t-lle considered view that the petitioner .Ls the owner and possessor of the subject plot to arr extent of 102.5 Sq.Yards having a.cquired through Gift settlement deed from her mother-in-law dated 08.08.2023. The grievance of the petitioner is that the online application filed by the petitioner on

16.Oa.2O23 for building permission was rejected on the grouncl that Bachupally Gram Panchayat passed resolution on 26.06.2021 not to give any house permission in Grama Kantam Land of Ac.6.15 guntas and open spaces in the villages.

7. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that some of the villagers, who are in possession of part of Grama Kantam land in Bachupalllr, have liled writ petition W.P.No.392/2008 questioning the proceedings dated

04.01.2008 of the respondent No.3 as well as the respondent No.1 and 2 therein directing demolition of structures erected by the petitioners therein rvere set / aside on the ground that the Grama Kantam land is sr,J not a Government land and is also not vested in Gram panchayat and restrained tJle respondents from interfering with the structures erected by the petitioners therein in any manner. Further, being aggrieved by the same, ttre respondent No.3 carried the matter in appeal vide W.A.No.784 of 2018 and the same was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on OI.O8.2O22 and held that the Grama Kantam land is not a Government land and the Judgment in Vunnqm Bangarraju Vs. Gooexnment of Andhra Pradesht is settled law.

8. ln Vunnam Bangarraju Vs. Gooerttrnent of Andlva Prqdesh (wprol this Court held that: "9. Grama Kantam l"o.nn is not a Gouemment l,and and there is no prohibition to un-dertake transactbns on tle said lands. In fact, Grama.kantam describes the area id.entified for the purpose of anstruction of rcsidential lauses and incidental structures in uillage. It is neither a gouernilent land nor land uested in the uillage Panchagats. Xxx | 2014 (3J,ALD 443 SK,J

12. No stafufie prouisos is brought to mg notice uhich ptohibit sale propertA standing in the name of a patticlrlar person, which is cla.ssified in tLE reuene re@rds a.s Grama kantam....."

9. The subject plot of the petitioner is also in situated in Grama Kantam land of Bachupally Village having acquired through gift settlement deed executed by her mother-in-law. Further some of the villagers have already constructed houses in the Grama Kantam land of Bahcupally village and living therein. The respondents cannot deny permission for construction of house over the subject plot on the ground that it is a Grama Kantam land.

10. In view of the same, the Writ petition is all6s,,6s1 and impugned order passed by the respond.ent No.3 is set aside, by directing the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to process the application filed by the petitioner dated L6.O8.2O23 for granting of building permission in respect of the subject plot i.e. lO2 Sq.yards situated at Grama Kantam land at Bachupalli village of Kandukur Mandal of Ranga Reddy District in accordance with f- l SK,J law, within Lwo (2) months from the date of receipt of copy ofthis order.

11. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall also stand closed. No order as to costs. Date:I8.O7 -2024 JUSTICE K.SARATH