S/o v. TheStateofTelangana

Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be .,...RESPONDENTS pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more part Writ of [\rlandamus declaring the action of the re resumption orders vide No.A2l3431l2O1S, dt.17.02.2 Sy.No.509/42 admeasuring Ac.1_20 gts., and in Sy.N 1 3 gts., and in Sy. No. S09 / 26 admeasuring Ac. 1 _20 admeasuring Ac.1_20 gts,, situated at Nagireddypet Kamareddy Dist., as illegal, arbitrary, immoral and Assigned Lands prohibition of Tran natural justice and consequently No. A213431 I 20 1 S, dt 1 7 .02.20 11. icularly one in the nature of spondent no.5 in passing 0'1 7 in respect of lands in o.509/6 admeasuring Ac.l - gts., and in Sy. No.509 /42 (V), Nagireddypet A,4a ndal. in violation of Telangana sfers Act, 1977 and against the prrnciples of to set aside the resumption orders vide t.A.NO 1 0F 2017 WVMP. NO: 2694 oF 2017 Between: The Slate of Telangana. Rep. by. the principal Secretary. Revenue ueparrmenr secreta riat erogs.. AvdeiabJJ :;6";;=.-, 2 4 5 of Land Administration, srare of rerangana, Nampaili, fiil"t ?3T[']ttioner Diskict Collector & Maqistra Kar"'"il;lp;;,:;fBtlil?J:1'lareddv Dist (erstwhire Nizamabad Diskicr) The Revenue Divisional Officer, Land acquisition Officer. Kamareddy ( urst. town and (l/andat) Dist. Kamaredd-y': dij;'i;'.""" The Tahsildar. Nagireddipet lVandal, Kamareddy Dist. 503 .108. AND ....PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 2 3 4 i,Kistaieh s/o Late Yerranki. Asha.iah. Ased 46 y=;il'81 XUilili,5il'."ff att"'rE,i"p[Yo""tii'n"h?.]iof B,il.##,t;ffi :fi:i#;,]"Si,?L..1 ;J:?!*' 3:I'ffi[1#:" and..LR-or Late Arrenki Ashaiah, Ased 6.r kam,,eoolbistr"riii*ilii5'r.rr*I:o,Ji],3.?;338?8r", Nt;g;"iirp"i"iilrl i[{::ij3J.i,:ffl ',S!'R'8'f P:::ly,: ,.lqqy {aiaiah, ^S/o Late Ashaiah, aoe Agncutturist,H.No. 7_14s p et' N a s i red d i p et( Ifi ), t "i.t* r,, r il i' i"", o J b] 3i r- r"oT,,t "' SXElSii(fi Y:'[:,{,?'&,'"t[?6?&#illid d-46 years, Occ Kamareddy Dist .....RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 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 di' 27 '04 2017 in WP'No 161 56 of 201 7 and dismiss the writ petition l.A.NO:2 oF 2017 (wP MP. NO: 19865 0F2017) 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 stay the dispossession of the petitioners in persuasion of notices dated: 8 8 2016 in respect of the subiect land in Survey Nos'509/6 admeasuring '1 -20; 509/26 admeasuring 1.13 Acres, 5r]gt41 admeasuring 1 20 Acres and 5ogl42 admeasuring '1 .20 situated in Nagireddpet village' tr/landal: Nagireddypet' Dist' Kamareddy, pending the disposal of Writ Petition in the interest of iustice l.A.NO:3 oF 20'17 (WPMP. NO: 28563 OF 20171 Petition the affidavit fi order for im Residential E ResPondent. Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in led in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pleadment of the Secretary(FAC)' Telangana Tribal Welfare ducational lnstitutions Society' tVlasab Tank' Hyderabad as 6th I r.A.NO: oF 2022 1 Petitrcn Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in e High Court maY be Pleased to the affidavit filed in support of the petition' th e in imPugned show cause notices declare the action f the respondent No-S in issu ana Assigned Land (Prohibition of to the petitioners under section 3 of the Telang 8.8-2016 after a laPse of 25 Years Transfers)Act, 1977 vide Fil no'A2/331/201 6 dt' e petitioners, as illegal, arbitrary' of assignment and trying to dispossession th atural justice and consequently set without authority and violative of principles of n 3rd. 4th, & ResPondents and his aside the said notices and further direct the ion of the petitioners in respect of subordinates not to interfere with the possess the land total admeasuring 5 Acres & 33 Guntas in SurveY No 509/6,509/26,5 09141 and 509/42 respectively situated in Nagireddypet (V), Nagireddypet Mandar, Kamareddy Dist. and arso consider the representation of the 1st petitioner addressed to the Hon'bre Minister for S.c. & S.T. Govt. of Terangana dr' 29.9 2021 & representation addressed to the 3rd Respondent dt. 19 08 2021 and stop further construction of s.T. Hoster Buirding in the petitioner,s land in the above Sy. No. 509. counser for the petitioners : sMoHD BASHEER RryAz, LEARNED couNSEL REPRESENTING Ms. B.RACHNA !91n39t_for the Respondents : SRt MOHD HABEEBUDDIN, LEARNED AGp FOR ASSIGNMENT The Court made the following ORDER I .,,7 THE HON'BLE SRi JUSTICE K'SARATH lllzuT PETITTON No. 16156 of2OL7 ORDER: ileard Mr. Mohci. Basltec; Riyaz, lea-rned Counsel rcprcsenting Ms. B. Itacirana, lcarneci lor the petitioners anrl \4r. Mohd. Habeebuddin, learncd Assistant GovcrnmenL Pleader for Assignment appearing for the responicnts and. perused the nraterial cn record' l,t:arncd counscl for thc petitioners subrrits that 2. t-he GcrvernLlent has as-"igned lhr:, lands in l';'r"'our oi thc iather c.ri Lhc pcti';ir.'r-rcr No- l- an c'l othcr petitiortcr-", v'rhc' bclong:; to SC Community irr tlre year, l9B9 arrc 1992 rcspcctively. After the rleath of his father, the,pe titione r No.I was in possession. of the ass:igr.ted laird ad'ncasuril-rg to an extent oJ A<:.1.2O gts in Sy'Nt>'509142 and t'be petitione r Nos.2 to 4 'wcre in possessicn of the assignecl lands adntcasuring to an cxtent of Ac' 1-l3 81-s jn Sy.No.5O9r/6, Ac. l-20 gts in Sy.lio'5C9/26 arci Ac.1-20 gts in Sy.No.5O9/42: r<;spectir'ely, sil"lateC at tlagircddyl-rct Villagc ar-rd N'lanciziL, Kamarcdci5' District ) W. p. ruo. f Of S6 c,t.2sfi'l ald pattadar passbooks were also issued to thern. He submits that the aliotment of the said assigned lands is under (i.O.Ms.No. 1724 dated 26.0g.19S9 ald the petitioners were cultivating the said uninterruptediy by paying the revenue tax and excavated two wells in their lands with the hnancial assistance of District SC & ST Cooperative Society, Nizarnabad ald iater they cleared the loals by way of instalments. 3. Learncd Counsel for the petitioners further submits that after a lapse of 24 years of assignment, the resporident No.5 has issued shovr cause noticcs vidc- File Nos.A2/343 t l20t6 dated O8.OB .2016 to the petitioners stating that the petitioners have transferred assigned lands in contravention of the provisions of Sub_ section (2) of Section 3 of Telangana Assigned (prohibition of Transfersl Act, lgZZ (For short .,pOT Act, 1927,,) and. as per Section 4 of the pOT Act, 1972, the lands are liable to be resumed to the Govcrnment for violation of provisions contained in Section 3 of the said Act. The ,the .? SK,J W.P.No.16156 of 2017 petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 ihave submitted their explanation on 18.08.20 16 and the petitioner Nos'3 and 4 have submitted their explanation on 22'Oa'2OI6' The respondents with a intention to construct hostel building' tried to dispossess the petitioners from their lands but the petitioners have refused to hand over the same' He submits that without considering the replies submitted by the petitioners, the respondent No'5 has passed vide No.A2l3431 l2Ot5 impugned resumPtion orders daled 17.02.2017 in resPect of the subject lands bY invokingpowersunderSections4(1)anda(1)(a)ofPoT Act, 1977. Learned counsel for the petitioners furtherr 'submits 4. that if the respondents want to acquire the lands of the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled for payment of compensation of market value on par rvith absoh';'te owners as held by the larger Bench of this Court in I'and' Acquisition OfficetCum-Reaenue Diaisionol Officer v' 4 W.P.lVo. f OtSO of ZSf;', Mekqla pand.ul . The respondents cannot acquire the lands of the petitioners without initiating lald acquisition proceedings arld without making payment of compensation. 5 Learned counsei for ths petitioners relied on the Judgment of a larger Bench of this Court in Land Acquisition Officer_Cum_Revenue Diaisional OfJicer u. Mekala pandu (Supra_t) and also the Judgments Passed by this Court ir_t B.Adinaragana Murthg u Collectorz o.nd. Jinka Chend.ragudu a. Joint Collectof and submits that the petitioners are entitied for compensation on pa_r with the private lands requested to allow the writ petition. 6. Learned Assistant Government pleader for Assignment basing on the counter submits that the Government has identified that the subject latds assrgned to the petitioners were not brought cuitivation by the assignees or any of the famil y members | 2OO4 (2) 2 1999 6) ALT 322 ls.B l ^LD r2oll(srArTIle 4:o7 7 SK,J W.P.No.16156 of 2017 since the date of assignment which is in violation of Condition No.3 of the patta certificate i e', Form-D Certihcate and identihed that the said lands are suitable for construction of Telangana Tribal Welfare Residential School for ST (Boys) which is a public need and therefore' notices under Section 3 of the POT Act, 1977 vtde Ref.No.A2l343t12016 dated 08'08'2016 were issued to the petitioners. He submits tl-rat the petitioners have frled C.C.No.1101 of 2Ol7 fot violation of the interim order of status-quo granted by this Court in W'P'No'16156 of 201.7 dated 27.04.2017 and the same was. dismissed on 26.O2.2O1a. FIe submits that after considering the explanations submitted by the petitionErs, the respondent No.5 has passed the impugned resumption order on the ground tha-t the petitioners han'e never cultivated the assigned lands from the date of assignment and as the subject lands were required lor public purpose, they have resumed the land into Government custody under a cover of panchanama on 22 'O3 '2017 .- artd handed over to the Tribal Welfare Department for 6 U'.P.No.l6lJ6 of ffi, construction of Telangana Tribar werfare Residentiar School for sr (Boys) and the building is under construction arid requested to dismiss the writ petition. 7. Learned Assistant Government pleader for Assignment further submits that the request of the petitioners for payment of land compensation in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettiement Act, 2013 (for brevig "RFCTLARR Act, 2o13"r cannot be considered as the petitioners were not in possession of the subject lands as on the date of initiation of proceedings for resumption. He further submits that the compensation shall be paid when the land is resumed for public purpose under the provisions of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and when the assignee is in enjoyment of the lands and as such, the question of payment of compensation to the petitioners under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 cloes not arise and requested to dismiss the writ petition. ,/ 'a 7 SK,J W.P.No. 16156 of 20I7 B. After hearing both sides and perusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that there is no dispute with regard to the assignment of lands to the petitioners by the respondent authorities' The impugned proceedings vide Ref'No'A2/3431 l2Ol5 d.ated, 17.02.2017 issued by the respondent No'5 for resumption of the subject lands from the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have failed to bring the land into cultivation within three years lrom the date of assignment and as the requirement of the land is for public purpose, the Government is resorting to resume the same without paying any compensation' In the impugned order, the respondent No'5 has specifltca-lly stated that there is no cultivation operation in the subject lands since last 20 years and as per patta condition No'3' the patta holder or his family members shall cultivate the subject land by own or by engaging labourers and bring the said land into cultivation within three years from the d.ate of grant of patta and after perusing the documentaqr and. oral evidence and after examining the site it was \ 8 SK,J W.P. No.16156 of 20I7 found that the Government land is required for public purpose and resumed the same.

9. The respondents in their counter have contended that the subject lands were resumed from the petitioners lbr public purpose as the petitioners are not in possession of the propert5r. For violation of conditions of assignment by the petitioners, they resumed the land. Thereafter, they',valt to use the land for public purpose. it clearly shows that the respondents want to acquire the land from the petitioners without paying any land acquisition compensation.

10. The .Judgment relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Land Acquisition Officer-Curn-Reuenue Diuisional OfJicer a. Mekala pandu (Supra-7) squarely apply to the instant case and the relevant portion of the said Judgment is as follows: " 1 1 1. In the ciratmstances, u)e hold thot the assignees of the gouernment lands are entitled to pogment of compensation equiualent to the fuII market ualue of the land. and other benefits on par uith full outners of the Land 9 SK,J W.P.No 16156 ot 2017 . euen in cases where the assiqned lands ore taken possession of bA the State in accord'ance wtth the tenns of grdnt or potta, though such resumption is for a public purpose- We further h'otd that euen in coses where the State does not inuoke the couenant of the grant or potta to tesume tte land- for such public putpose and rescrts to acquisition of the tond undei' the prouisions of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894, the ossignees shall be entitled to compensation ds owners oj' the land cnd for all other consequentiol benefits und'er the prouisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 18g4 No condition incorporated in patta/ deed of ossignntent sholl operote as a clog putt'ng ang restiction on the nght of the ossignee to clain full catnpensation as otrner oj the ianC"" i i. The Judgment relied by the learnei counsel for the petitioner in B'Adinaragana Murthg u' CclTector (Supra'2) sqllarely apply to the instant case and the relevant portion of the said Judgment is as fo[dv1s: . an this grounci olone, I mu st sclli ' the potuer of 1 8. re.sumptton of ossigned lancls connct be ertendcd begond a reasonable period, irt arltl euent' nat loter than f'ue lo six geors. Euen utithin fitte to six years u.then the potuer has to be exercised, there must be necessartl inspection by the atfihoities on the basis of which a decisicn to resume the lands be taken preceding a notice to the patlies concerned" Section al)@) oi the Act enuiseges thal euett iJ there is uiolation of certain terfi''s and cotditiorts bg the assignee r.\ ,." ,o. tUrrU o,,tJii the land shall be restr.tred. to the assignee or his legal heirs as the case mog be and if there is a uiolation oJ. the terms of assignment for the second. time, it utotLld be open to tlte cluthoities to resume the lands. I haue, therefore, no hesitaLion to say that the respondents haue no authority to resuffLe the lands alter long lapse of more than 34 gears ot1. sorne JTimsg grouncls 1-he jirst questiorL is ansu..teretl accordinglg." t2 The Judgment relied by the learned counsel for the petrtioner 1n Jinko. Chendragudu Joint Collector (Supra-S) squarely apply to the instant case and the relevant portion of the said Judgment is as folrows a " 1 1 - Be that as it maA, tlte petitioner claims that the land in question uas assigned to him in thte genr 1976, and tJ according to respondent No.3, the land, as per the conditions of D-Form patto, u)as required to bing the rand. L.Lnder cultiuation uithin three gears from the d.ate of its tssuance, and if the petitioner failed. to bing the land. under ctLltiuation, ulithin three years from the d.ate oJ. its issuance', then respondent No.3, ought to haue issued. notice cairir-g uport him to shou cause as to uthg the D-Fonn. patta should. not be cancelled_, immediatet.g after expiry of three gears fron the d.ate of issuance oJ. the D-Form patta, and. instead. of d_oing that, he has isstted the shout causc notice on 17.O2.2OO5; o ^rt^- t___ 3o sears He further ",rl?r;i"'"'l^"r ;rL',*'r,,j",::;:: issued the shou.t cause notice after lapse of nearty 30 11 SK,J W.P.No.16156 oI 2017 Aeors, it will not be possible to oscertain as to uthether the land. utas brought under cultiuation within three gears from the date of issuance of D-Form patto or noL This Court in Sekhari Aruna Kumari' u Dtst' 12. Coltector, Visakhapatnam and Modamaneni Chinnasutamg (died) per LRs' u' Joint Collector' Chittoor' held that pouer to cancel the D-Form potto or resume the land, by the reuenue authoities must be exerci^sed tttithin a reasonable time and that if D Fonn patta uas to be cancelled-, the grounds on uhich it is sought to be concelled haue to stated, to enable the assignee to shotu cause. In the instant case, the D-Form patto uas cancelled after lapse of 3O geors, and the shotu couse notice issued. in that regard, d'id not spectfu the ground on uthich the DKT utas to be cancelled, and in fact' it is uery clear from the proceedings os utell as the record produced' the shout cause notice, tt'thich led to passing of cancellotion of D-Form patta granted in fauour of the petitioner' is at the instance of respondent Nos' 4 and 5' Merelg bqcause respondent Nos. 4 and 5 haue been in possession of the tand in question since seueral years, it is not open for them to seek carucellotion of patta granted to some other person and seek assignment of the same in their fauour'"

13. In the instant case, the respondents have assigned lands to the petitioners in the year, 1989 and 1992' The respondents have issued the present impugned orders on the ground of violation of assignment conditions alter 24 L2 w.p.No.r6rs6 ort#i, years. The hndings of the above Judgments squarely apply to the instant case as this Court categorically held that after lapse of several yea_rs, the responclents have no authorit5z to resume the lands on flimsy grounds. If the respondents want to use the land for the public purpose, they have to initiate iand acquisition proceedings and pay the compensation as held by the larger Bench of this Court in La.nd. Acquisition Officer_Cum_Reuenue Diuisional Officer u. Mekalq pcrnd.u (Supra-l). 14. In r,.iew of the same, the impugned orders passed by the respondent No.5 vide No.aZTS+St /2015 dated 17.02.2012 and the consequential panchanama dated 22.O3.2OI2 are liable to be set aside 15 In view of the above findings, this Writ petition is allowed by. setting aside the rmpugned orders vide No.A2 / 3431 / 2015 dated, 17.O2.2O17 and consequential panchanama dated 22.O3.2077. As the respondents have acquired the lands of the petitioners, they have to initiate the land acquisition proceedings under the Right to Fair l3 SK,J w.P,No.I6156 of 2017 Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for payment of compensation to the petitioners for their respective assigned lands and conclude the same within four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' There shall be no order as to costs.

16. Misceilaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed' /-;) SD/.P ^"i$ iRiE[ts?HXA SE CTION OFFTCER //TRUE COPY// To '+nft :;I.:lil![#t1"#ff:il:::::::'#r:1;,:::*" 4 Tha chief commisstone ;+ 'l"ryurum"N+#ffiili*: , S#'gA?}fft'3H1"**o' Advocate toPucl b. r*o CD CoPies GJPg SA I I I i HIGH COURT DATED:1310812025 1 t

1. t 'i.-sq, '9: \. -^ r\ .-,\ ,.i '. 5iP 2p5 i j .L) li-:t !.,/, ORDER WP.No.16156 of 2017 t ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. \\