1. Perika Balraj v. 1. The State of Telangana

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 t'espondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands belongs to the 1st Petitioner admeasuring an extent of Ac.3-37 Gts of land situated in Survey No. 506 of Raipole Village, lbrahimpatan Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counselfor the Petitioners: SRI K.MURALIDHAR REDDY counselfor the Respondents: Ms.swATHt, AGp FoR tRRtGATIoN The Court made the foltowing: ORDER i a : : : I AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI 2015 Betweeen: DATE OF ORDER 22.12.20/25

1. Perika Balraj S/o P.Venkataiah, and 1 other petitioners And

1. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Minor Irrigation Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and 4 others. ...respondents ORDER: This writ petition is filed with the following prayer: o...to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of the writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands beloigs to the ' lst Petitioner admeasuring an extent of Ac.3-37 Gts] of land situated in survey No.506 of Raipole village, Ibrahimpatan Mandal, Ranga Reddy district, without issuing any notice and ' without following due process of law in acquiring the rand under the provisions of Right to Fair compens-ation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation Act, 2or3 is arbitrary, unreasonable and in violation of Articles tq, zt and 3oo-A of constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands belongs to the l"t petitioner admeasuring an extent of Ac.3.37 Gts. of land situated in survey No.5o6 of Raipole vilrage, Ibrahimpatan Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and to pass ..." JAK,J wP_10206 2015 H,sard Mr. K.Muralidhar Reddy, learned counsel for .2 2 petitioners and Ms. S.Swathi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation for respondents.

3. k:arned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners have p'urchased agricultural land to an extent of Ac.3.07 guntas, situated in Sy.No.506 of Raipole Village, Ibrahirrrpatnam Mandal, under a registered sale deed bearing docume'nt No.24O4 of 2000, dated 02.08.2000, for a sale consideration. Subsequently, petitioners purchased an extent of Ac.O. 1O guntas of adjacent land in Sy.No.5O6 by another registered sale deed bearing document No.3832, dated

12.L2.2OO2 and further, purchased an extent of Ac.0.2O guntas in Sy.No.506 by an unregistered sale deed.

4. It is submitted that petitioners purchased a total extent of Ac.3.37 guntas of land in Sy.No.5O6. It is further submitted that th,: land of petitioners and adjacent lands are locally called as Nagoji Kunta, there is no such tank existing in their land and in the surrounding lands admeasuring around Ac.2O.OO guntas. ,t/ // f t JAK,J wP_l0206_201s

5. It is submitted that an application under section 4 of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and pattadar passbooks Act, 7971, is made seeking mutation of the narrres of petitioners in the revenue records, for issuance of pattadar passbook & title deeds. That pursuant to the application, proceedings were issued by the Tahsildar to the entire extent of land of Ac.3.37 guntas and pattadar passbook vide patta No.g67 was issued. It is also submitted that petitioner No.2 is wife of petitioner No.l and she is running a poultry farm in the subject propert5r.

6. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that state Government under Mission Kakatiya has taken up the restoration works of Minor Irrigation Tanks. It is the specific case of petitioners that respondent Nos.4 and 5 came to the land of petitioners on o2.o4.2ols and directed petitioner No.2 to remove the poultry shed and stated that the said land belongs to Government. It is submitted that next d"y, respondents again appeared and marked the land for digging and construction of tank. That a representation (Ex.p2) was made on o4.o4.2015 to respondent Nos.3 to 5 not to interfere JAK,J wP_l0206_2015 in petitioners' property by enclosing the pattadar passbook .4 (Page N,cs.2O, 2l,Ex.P3) and revenue records.

7. It is lastly submitted that respondent authorities cannot interferr: with the peaceful possession of the property of petitioners without following due process of Iaw. That if the authorities intend to proceed with the restoration work in patta le,nds, it is to be carried out in accordance with law. That t.ne same is not forthcoming from the acts of respondents. Hence, the writ petition.

8. Learned counsel for petitioners filed a reply affidavit to the cou:nter affidavit filed by respondent No.4. Page Nos.17 to 1O3 aro copies of revenue records, s.ale deeds, copies of pattadar passbooks and certificates issued by the concerned Tahsildar in respect of the extent of land in Sy.No.5O6. Placing reliance on these doeuments, it is contended that land to an extent of Ac.3.37 guntas is a private patta land and that official respondents cannot interfere illegally and unlawfully.

9. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government i i Pleader for official respondents submitted that Government of Telanga.na has taken up the program of 'Mission Kakatiya' for ) JAK,J wP_I0206_2015 restoration of tanks & kuntas and as part of the said program, the subject tank namely Tlagoji Kunta, was proposed to be restored to FTL. counter affidavit is filed by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation & cAD department. It is the case of official respondents that the extent of land of Ac.3.37 guntas is part and parcel of a water body namery 'Nagoji Kunta' located in Raipole Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal. That the said Nagoji Kunta is an ancient tank and was formed several decades ago and the copies of village maps, topo sheet and revenue records of years 1955-58, reflect that the tank is in existence for long. It is further submitted that the said Nagoji Kunta is an identified tank with an I.D.No.543. That a preliminar5r notification was issued on L2".o4.2oLT in respect of said tank, uploaded in the website and that the extent of tank is 8.538 Acres in into Sy.No.SO2/p, 503/p, 504/p and 5O6/P and ayacut of the tank is around Ac.20.OO guntas.

10. It is submitted that as the tank was proposed to be restored to FTL levels, some repair work was und.ertaken to the existing bund, estimated at s.6o lakhs and that Government vide G.o.Ms.No.49 of Irrigation Department dated 25.03.2015 granted administrative sanction. That when _ ,6 JAK,J wP_10206 20t5 the proposed work was und.ertaken tolrestore the tank to its FTL, petitioner filed the present writ petition and in view of the interim order, authorities could not carry out the restoration work. Placing reliance on Section 24 of Land Revenue Act, l3l7 Fasli, it is submitted that as the subject land is part and parcel of water body, the State can take steps for restoration. It is further submitted that the mutation in the reve,nue records, issuance of pattadar passbooks by the concerned Tahsildar, are void ab initio as per Section 47 of the Irrigation Act, 1357 Fasli. It is lastly submitted that petitiont:rs cannot claim any rights over the subject land on the basis of mutation proceedings and pattadar passbooks, as the said land is under FTL.

11. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and considered the submissions.

12. It is the case of petitioners that they purchased the subject land admeasuring Ac.3.37 guntas in Sy.No.506 of Raipole Village. Petitioner contended that an extent of Ac.3.07 guntas of land was purchased by way of registered sale deed dated 02.08.2000. That the rest of Ac.O.30 guntas was JAK,J wP 10206 2015 purchased on different dates in the same suryey number- 7 Petitioner purchased an extent of Ac.0.10 guntas through a registered sale deed dated L2.L2.2OO2 bearing document bearing No.3832. It is averred in the writ affidavit that petitioners purchased an extent of Ac.O.20 guntas in Sy.No.506 by an unregistered sale deed. The Tahsildar of Ibrahimpatnam Mandal issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds on the basis of an application made under Section 6(4) of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, L971, read urith Section 4, vide proceedings No.D/3848/2OOL, dated 03.10.2001, proceedings No.D/28 l2OO3, dated 16.04.2003 and proceedings No.ROR/ 55212005, dated 09. 10.2006. P.etitioners names are recorded as pattadars and possessors and pattadar passbook issued bearing patta No.867.

13. It is the case of official respondents that the said land in sy.No.506 forms part of Nagoji Kunta (tank) and the subject land falls under FTL and that the documents presented by petitioners cannot be sustained in the light of the fact that land falling under F"tL zonelbuffer zorae cannot be said to be private patta land of petitioners. It is adverted in the counter JAK,J 10206 20ls affidavit that the land is Shikam land and petitioner is 8 - entitled to cultivate the said land during offseason.

14. Mission Kakatiya program is for restoration of tanks in the larg:r public interest and the said tank has an ayacut of Ac.20.00 guntas, the extent of tank is 8.538 Acres in Sy.Nos.li}2lP, 503/P, 5O4lP and 5O6lP as per revenue records annexed with the counter affidavit. On a perusal of the courrter affidavit (at Page No.9, in Cl.No.1 at Sl.No.528), it is reflected that Sy.No.5O6 is recorded. as aibuk chelka dastugard and the extent of land of Ac.3.27 guntas is Nagoji Kunta Chelka/Venkabhoomi dastugard. In G.O.Ms.No.49, dated 25.03.2015 at to Sl.No.35, the said tank Nagojikunta tank it;s Unique ID, the village, the Mandal, longitude, latitude, ayacut and the cost of the repair works, are reflectect. It is adverted in the counter affidavit that the extent of Ac.3.:37 guntas is part and parcel of water body i.e., Nagoji Kunta, that by suppressing this fact, petitioners filed the present writ petition.

15. W.hen restoration works under Mission Kakatiya prograrrr are undertaken on a piece of land, it has to be in 9 JAK,J wP_I0206_201s accordance with law. No doubt G.o.Ms.No.49 has been issued and the name of the kunta is reflected at sI.No.3S, the estimated cost is Rs.5.3g rakhs, these facts are not in dispute. whenever officiar respondents are taking up the restoration work, it is imperative that official respondents have to fo,ow due process of law. Grievance of petitioners is that no due process of law is followed. petitioners were not been put to notice before undertaking work under Mission Kakatiya program. Petitioners must have been put to notice before taking up the work which effects their property in the said extent of land. L6. It is observed from the record that authorities visited the site, tried to restore the said tank. That,s when the writ petition came to be filed and in view of the interim order, authorities did not undertake the restoration works of Nagoji Kunta. t.,\ \ 17 ' Be that as it ffiay, respondents have to take up restoration works under the Mission Kakatiya program by following due process of raw. Restoration of tanks is in the larger public interest, not issuing of notice to petitioners - JAK"J wP_10206 2015 amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. 10 Respondents are empowered to take necessary steps for restoration of tanks by following due process of law. If official respondents are intending to take up any work in future, they. shall pu.t petitioners on notice, as is evident from the record that petitioners made a representation. Petitioners are at liberty tr: avail remedies in accordance with law, if authorities undertake any further work in future effecting the subject propert5l. It is made clear that this court has not gone into any othe:r aspect, other than what is contended.

18. Fo:r reasons aforesaid, writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Mirscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/.M.OSMAN ALI BAIG REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, t. Lng Principal Secretary, Minor lrrigation Department, Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad.

2. The E:ngineer-in-Qhiet, Minor lrrigation Department, state of relangana, ErramManzil, Hyderabad.

3. !ne. fitLperlntendent Engineer, lrrigation Circle Office Ranga Reddy District, at Red Hills, Hyderabad. -

4. The Eixecutive Engineer, l. B. Division, Hyderabad, at Red Hills, Hyderabad. 5. !he. ftepyty.Elecutive Engineer, l.B. Sub Division, lbrahimpatnam, Ranga Redd'y District.

6. One OC to SRI K.MURALIDHAR REDDY, Advocate tOpUCI 7. Two OCs to GP FOR IRRIGATION, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

8. Two OD Copies W HIGH GOURT DATED i2211212025 3 ORDER WP.No.10206 of 2015 ( THE s () () * 2 I fiAR ?rnfr * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS $ p