Boda Achali v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to and pertaining to proceedings vide R.C.No.E5/E11463712012 and order dated 18-5-2018 on the file of the Joint Collector, Mahabubabad District i.e., 4th respondent and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and also against the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.1493 Revenue (Assn.POT) dated 1-12-2017 and consequential directions to the respondents not to interefere in the peaceful possession and enjoyment over the petitioner landed property in survey No.28711 admeasuring Ac.1.19 guntas situated at Gummudur village, Mahabubabad mandal, Mahabubabad District in any manner forthwith. lA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 suspend the proceedings vide R.C.No.E5lE1l4637120'12 dated 18-5-2018 passed by the 3'd respondent in respect of petitioner landed property i.e., survey No.28711 admeasuring Ac.1.19 guntas situated at Gummudur village, Mahabubabad mandal, Mahabubabad District pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. Seeretary to Revenue The Chief Commissioner, Land Administration, Hyderabad at Nampalli Station Road, Hyderabad. 3. The District Collector. Mahabubabad District. Warangal Previously, Presently Mahabubabad,

4. The Joint Collector, Mahabubabad, Mahabubabad District. 5. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad, Mahabubabad District 6. The Tahsildar, [Mahabubabad Mandal, Mahabubabad Distdct. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 2 Boda Achali, W/o. Sevya, Aged about 46 years, Occ. Agriculture, Ri/o. Gummudur village, Mahabubabad Mandal, Warangal District. - ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER The Executive Engineer, District Roads and Buildings Officer, Mahabubabad, Mahabubabad District.

3. The Deputy Engineer (R and B), Sub Division, Mahabubabad, Mahabubabad District. (Respondent Nos.7 & 8 in WP Respondent Nos.2 & 3 herein are not necessary) ...RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim orders passed in lA.No.i/2018, dated:18/06/2018 in wP.No.20200/2018 and dismiss the writ petition with costs as devoid of merits. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt V.BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent No..l to 6: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.7 & 8: Gp FOR ROAD & BUILDINGS The Court made the following: ORDER Y THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.2O2OO oF 2018 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and perused the entire material on record. 2. The petitioner in the present writ petition is questioning the proceedings issued by the respondent No.4 uide R.C.No.ES/El / 4637 l2ol2, dated 18'05'2018 as the same is contrary to the G.O.Ms'No'1493, Revenue (Assn.POT), dated o I .12-2OO7 . 3. After hearing both sides this Court is of the considered view that the respondent-authorities have assigned the land to the petitioner situated in Sy.No.287/1, admeasuring to an extent of Acs'1'19 gts', at Gummuduru Vitlage, Mahabubabad Mandal, Warangal District, in the year 20OB uide assignment file No.B 1298 l2OO8, dated 1 1.04.2008, by the respondent No.5. Thereafter, the respondent No.5 cancelled the said L ---T1 ) proceedings on the ground that the suit schedule property was within the 2 Kilometres radius of the Mandal Head Quarters and the same is contrary to the G.O.Ms.No.1493 Revenue (Assn.pOT), dated O7.I2.2OOZ. Aggrieved by the action ol the respondent No.4, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition and also filed Appeal before the respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 uide order dated 20.lO.2Ol4, remanded the matter to the Joint Collector, Warangal, thereafter, the respondent No.4 rejected the Appeal" vide dated

18.05.2018 in Rc.No.ES / El / 4637 I 2012. 4 . The contention of the petitioner is that without considering the grounds raised by the petitioner as well as the material filed by him, the respondent No.4 rejected the Appeal filed by the petitioner by passing impugned orders dated 18.05.2018. The respondent Nos.7 and B who are the Executive Engineer and the Depugr Executive Engineer (R and B), categorically submitted a report in Nos. DB letter /DL/SED /MBD /cr /2ot7 -18 /776, dated

22.O5.2018 1I and in DEE(R and B)/MHBD/DCl2Ol8-19, dated

06.05.20 1B stating that the respondent No.B has personally inspected the suit schedule property along with revenue authorities and submitted a report that the land in Sy.No.287/ 1, to an extent of Acs. 1.19 gts., situated at Gummudur Village of Mahabubabad Mandal is with a distance of 2.BO Kms. from railway station, Mahabubabad. The said proceedings were not considered by the respondent No.4 while passing the impugned order dated 18.05.2018. The above said report clearly shows that the suit schedule property is more than 2 Kms from the Mandal Head Quarters and the assignment was granted in favour of the petitioner as per rules.

5. In the impugned orders, dated 18.O5.2O18, the respondent No.4 stated that since iong time Mahabubabad is a Mandal and Division head quarter, Gummudur and Mahabubabad are twin villages which were later upgraded as Municipality and after bifurcation of the districts, Mahabubabad town was formed as ne\ r 4 \ District Head euarter and the land assigned to the petitioner to an extent of Ac. 1.19 gts., is for agriculture purpose only, but not for house site purpose and the land assigned falls within the 2 Kms. peripheral of Mahabubabad Mandal Head euarter which contravenes the provisions of G.O.Ms.No. 1493, Revenue (Assn.pOT), dated O 1. t2.2OO7 . 6. But, as per records, it clearly shows that Gummudur and Mahabubabad are seperate villages and assignment patta was granted in favour of the petitioner tnde assignment file No.B / 298 / 2008, dated' 1 1 .04.2008. Initially, the respondent No.S has cancelled the assignment patta based on G.O.Ms.No.633, Revenue (Assn.POT), dated 05.05.19g2 as the subject land was within 5 Kms radius from the Mandal Head euarter in proceeding Rc.No.A/567/2011, dated 16.O7.2011 and the same was subject matter before this Court in W.P.No.29448 of 2O1l and after disposal of the earlier writ petitions and after two rounds of litigation, now the respondents have taken a view that Gummudur and Y 5 Mahabubabad are twin villages and later the same were upgraded as Municipality and taken a view that the land contrary to the assigned to the petitioner 1S I G.O.Ms.No.1493, Revenue (Assn.POT), dated ot.12.2007. 7. The operative portion of the G.O.Ms.No.1493, Revenue (Assn.POT), dated 01.I2.2OO7, is as follows: "4. After careful examination of the proposal of the land Administration, A.P., Chief Commissioner of Hyderabad, Government direct that all the vacant Government larrd situated within 2 KMs for the peripheral areas of Malda.l Headqua-rters shall be got entered in the Prohibitive Order Book and alienation of such Golrt. land hereby banned, except in tJle case of house sites, the land could be utilizecl with the prior permission of the concerned Drstrict Collcctor, in partial modification of Para 4 ( 1) of orders issued in thc G.O.3'd read above." B. The respondent No.4 in the impugned proceedings dated 18.O5.2O18 mentioned about the report submitted by the respondent Nos.7 and 8, but not considered the said report. In the said report, it is clearly mentioned that the suit schedule property is situated at Gummudur Village and with a distance of 2.BO Kms from Mahabubabad Mandal Head Quarters. 6

9. The respondent No.4 has to take into account of the date of assignment made in favour of the petitioner, but not present status of the said village, as the said village was merged with the Municipality after the assignment was granted. While assigning the land to the petitioner, the authorities have not violated the G.O.Ms.No.1493, Revenue (Assn.POT), dated Ol.L2.2OO7 as the suit schedule land is situated at Gummudur Village and the said village is with a distance ol 2.80 Kms lrom Mahabubabad Mandal Head Quarters. 10. In view of the same, the respondent No.4 cannot cancel the assignment made in favour of the petitioner only on the ground that the subject iand is within radius of 2kms from the Mandal head Quarters and the impugned order dated 18.05.2018, is liable to be set aside on the ground of non-application of mind and contrary to the report submitted by the respondent Nos.7 and 8.

11. In view of the above findings, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceedings 7 passed by respondent No.4 R.C.No.E5/E114637 12012, dated 18.05.2018 and the assignment patta granted to the petitioner in respect of suit schedule land in File No.B/298/2OOB, dated II.O4.2OO8 needs no interference by the authorities on the ground of distance lrom the Mandal Head Quarters. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. rhe Hon'ble sRl ALoK AR"ir;i?: T'h;-c-iiGi 'lustice That Rule Nisi has made Absolute as above witness Twentieth orv ot 'l"f'"'t]'T# ih;t*Jand rwEntv Five' on this Mondav' the SD/-S. AS MALLIKARJUNA RAO TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// oNOFFICER To, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings' The Principal Secretary to Hvderabad, State of Telangan d Administration, Hyderabad at Nampalli Station T6e Chief Commissioner, Lan ?fr3, #J.d.:Jit3iirector. waransar previousry, presenrv Mahabubabad, Mahabubabad District i'f;':;iliairL-.t,iivr"11X',33,1ir;H*1?'r',1?if JB:ffi The Revenue Divisional u +il i;h;iil;"t, rr.,l a r' a o u ua ra-O M ano at' Mahabuba bad Distri ct' rhe Executive Ensineer, 6i;;;i'il;a; inJ riuitoinss officer' Mahabubabad' YfiB53S,?'PPJii::i (R & B), sub Division' Mahabubabad' Mahabubabad "oDistrict 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 l.?,il'[:s,:HPmffi cft ,fl?URH",^l|"'..1".i'.t3['$-"''"sanaat .,.,.?il,1"33',.0,1o38 to* R.AD & BUILDINGS' High court for the state of ' ' iiringJ* at HYderabad [oUT] 12.Two CD CoPies BSR BS HIGH COURT DATED: 2010112025 ORDER WP.No.20200 ot 2018 rF4- . 1$E $f,q r{- o :) 17 rn ?ull I I i crlFfi aJ' / ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS 9