Siddapuram Mallaiah , Uradi Mallaiah v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.6938 of 2019 ORDER:

Heard.

2. Petitioner claims to be the pattedar and possessor of the land to an extent of Acs.6.00 guntas in survey No.144 of Udandapur Village, Jadcherla Mandal, Mahaboob Nagar District, having acquired by succession. Earlier, petitioner instituted O.S.No.50 of 2013 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Jadcherla, and obtained a decree of perpetual injunction against the defendants therein whose names are mentioned in the complaint made by the petitioner on 09.07.2018. Petitioner also filed W.P.No.29814 of 2017 along with others challenging the action of the State in forcibly taking the lands for Udandapur Reservoir under Palamur-Ranga Reddy Project and the said writ petition was disposed of directing the State to follow due process. Petitioner also filed W.P.No.

30765 of 2018 seeking a direction to the Tahsildar and District Collector to issue cheques to him under Rythu Bandu scheme and also a direction to the Police to provide security to his life and limb from the threats of private persons, who were allegedly attempting to evict him from his land with the active support of Tahsildar and Village Revenue Officer.

3. This Writ Petition is filed alleging inaction on petitioner's representation dated 09.07.2018 and not providing security for his life and limb.

4. As can be seen from the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, on the very same issue,

W.P.No.30765 of 2018 was filed by the petitioner and the same is pending consideration of this Court. Therefore, the petitioner cannot institute successive writ petitions on the same issue.

5. Even otherwise, a prima facie reading of the complaint filed by the petitioner would show that petitioner's land would fall within Udandapur Reservoir, he was not paid money under Rythu Bandhu scheme and therefore his grievance is against nonpayment of money. In other words, the petitioner has a serious grievance regarding the stand of the respondent-revenue authorities with reference to his claim on the land and that he is not allowed to access the property. Therefore, prima facie, petitioner cannot seek involvement of the Police to restore possession. On the issue of possession, petitioner has to work out his remedies as available in common law. He is entitled to prosecute W.P.No.30765 of 2018 pending consideration of this Court.

6. Leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his remedies and to pursue the writ petition pending before this Court, this Writ Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 2nd April, 2019.

sur