✦ High Court of India · 03 Jul 2025

1. Gaddala Ram Babu v. 1. The State of Telangana

Case Details High Court of India · 03 Jul 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
03 Jul 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,621 words

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lr dra praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction especially one rn the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that. a) the action of the Respondent; in seeking to evict the Petitioners from the land assigned to them in their respective survey numbers situated in Dhamsalapuram Village, Khammam Urban lt4andal, Khammam District is illegal and arbitrary b) further declare that, Petition€ rs being assignees of Government land and having issued with Pattedar Pass Books and Ti e Deeds in their favour, Petitioners are entitled to continue and do Aqricutture operations in the land assigned to them in their respective survey numbers situated in Dhamsalapuram Village, Khammam Urban IVlandal, Khamrrarn District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section '1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Co:rt may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to take any coercive steps ag;tinst the petitioners by allowing the Petitioners to continue their possession in the Iand assigned to them in Dhamsalapuram Village, Khammam Urban IVlanda, Khammam District, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SRINIVASA RAO MADIRF,JU Counsel for the Respondents: ASST.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASXAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 18879 of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking following reliet "For the reasons accompalying the affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Hon'Lrle Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that: a) the action of the Respondents in seeking to evict the Petitioners from the land assigned to them in their respective survey numbers situated in Dhamsalapuram Village, Khammam Urban Mandal, Kha-mmam District is ilegal arrd arbirary b) further decla-re that, Petitioners being assignees of Government land and having issued with Pattedar Pass Books and Title Dceds in their favour, Petitioners are entitlcd to continue and do Agriculture operations in the land assigned to them in their respective survey numbers situatcd in Dhamsalapuram Village, Khammam Urban Mandal, Kharnmam District c) and pass srrch order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deemed frt and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2. It is stated that petitioners, who belong to Schedule Caste Community, were assigned various extents of agricultural lands in Survey No.4O8 and its sub-divisions, situated at Dhamsalapuram Village, Khammam Urban Mandal, Khammam District (for short, 'the subject lands), in terms of the policy laid down by the Government under G'O.Ms.No.1406 dated 25.07.1958 and individuat Assignment Pattas were issued in favour of the petitioners and thereafter, their narnes have been recorded in the revenue records and pattadar passbooks and title.deeds were also issued in favour of the petitioners in respect of the to the extents of the lands assigned to them and the petitioners are enjoying the subject laads ald they have not violated the terms and conditions of the assignment pattas granted to them. 2 CVBR, J W,P.No.18879 of 2O25 It is further stated that in the enquiry held by the respondent authorities, they have noticed that out of Acs. 42.00 guntas of land assigned to landless poor, land around Acs. 14.OO guntas has not been used for agriculture purpose, which is contrary to the guidelines issued b5 lhe Government in G.O.Ms.No.1406 dated 25.07.1958 and the said lalld hirs been converted to house plots. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent authorities are trying to evict the petitioners from the subject lands and resume the said lands on the ground that the petitioners are neither using the said lands for any other purpose nor converted the said 1alds. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader fo:- Revenue appearing for the respondents and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

4. learned counsel for the petitioners vehemer tly contended that the respondent authorities are making efforts to forcef.ll1. dispossess the petitioners from the subject lands of the petitioners, v:ithout conducting any enquiry and without identi$ring the nature of the subject lalds as to whether they are converted from agricultura,l land to non-agricultural purpose and if the some extents of the subject lalds are converted from agricultural to non-agricultural purpose, whether aly enquiry has been conducted for identi$ring the persons who converted the said la,ds from agricultural to non-agricultural purpose. Learned counsel further 3 CVBR, J W.P.No.18879'of 2O25 contended that the petitioners have not converted any extent of the subject lands from agricultural land to non-agricultural purpose ald they have not violated the conditions of the assignment pattas granted to them and they have a-lso not violated the terms and conditions of the policy enunciated by the Government under G.O.Ms.No. 1406 dated 25.07.1958.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submitted that the respondent authorities have received credible information that some of the assignees have converted some extents of the subject lands from agricultural land to non-agricultural purpose, which is in violation of the terms ald conditions of the assignment pattas granted to them and therefore, the said lands are liable for resumption.

6. Except making the said submission, learned Assistant Government Pleader has not placed before this Court any record either with regard to issuance of notice to the assignees or conducting any enquiry for resumption of the subject lands. If any of the assignees have violated the terms and conditions of the assignment pattas issued to them, the respondent authorities are at libertJr to initiate proceedings abainst them in accordance with law for resumption of the lands, but the respondent authorities are not having any power or authorit5r to resume the lands from the persons who have not violated any of the terms and conditions of the assignment pattas issued to them. To determine whether there is any violation of the terms and conditions of the assignment pattas by the : 4 CVBR, J W.P.No.18879 of 2025 ; petitioners or the other assignees, it is necessary for the respondent authorities to conduct an enquiry after following tht: due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Telangana Rights il Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short, the ROR Act,.-977\.

7. In view of the above discussion, this Court rleems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent authorities to follow the due procedure as contemplated under the pt ovisions of the ROR Act, l97l before initiating any action for resumption ol the lands from the persons who have violated the terms and conditions of the assignment pattas as well as the terms and conditions of the poli.:y laid down by the Government under G.O.Ms.No.1406 dated 25.07. 195i1. Except following the sajd procedure, the respondent authorities shall not interfere into the possession of the subject lands of the petitioners in aly marner.

8. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall s;tand closed. //TRUE COPY// SEr/- K.BHAVANI SWAMY AsisrsrANry,AffisrRAR / SECTIOlI OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue- Dep'artment, Dr.B.R.Anibedkar.Telahgana State Secretariat, State of Telangana, Hyderabad

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Khammam, Khammam District 3. The Tahsildhar, Khammam Urban, Khammam Districl 4. One CC to SRI SRINIVASA RAO IvIADIRAJU, Advocate. [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana

6. Two CD Copies. BSK ,r. e HIGH COURT DATED:0310712025 r6 ($ ! a L ..' { 1O SEP 2U ,, * a i5,:,a;1.rr(-r \.:: ORDER WP.No.18879 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS toVlz'

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments