Avirineni Srikanth v. The State Of Telangana
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No. 17030 of 2015 Dated 23rd June, 2015.
BETWEEN Avirineni Srikanth and anr
...Petitioners
And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl.Secretary, Scheduled Caste Development Department, Tribal Welfare (LTR), Secretariat, Hyderabad and ors. ...
Respondents.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No. 17030 of 2015 ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: "to issue Writ or directioni preferably writ of mandamus declaring the order issued by the 1ST respondent in Memo No.679/LTR-2/2015-1, dt.30.5.2015 rejecting petitioners' request for grant of stay pending Revision filed on 30.1.2015 against the order of the 2nd respondent dt. 28.9.2013 in C.M.A.No.247/2007 confirming the order of the 3rd respondent in Case No.75/99/KGM dt.11.2.2005 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider and dispose the revision
itself within a reasonable time and further directing the respondents or their subordinate staff not to dispossess the petitioners from the land in Sy.No.54/2/E to an extent of Acs.0.32 gts consisting of house properties situated at Chatakonda village of Kothagudem Mandal, Khammam district, pending disposal of the revision on the file of the 1st respondent and pass any other order ...."
Heard Sri K. Vinaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare. The Special Deputy Collector (TW), Bhadrachalam, Khammam District - 3rd respondent herein passed an order under the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Areas) Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 ordering rejectment of the petitioners herein from the land admeasuring Ac.0.32 guntas situated in Sy.No.54/2/E of Chatakonda village of Kothagudem Mandal, Khammam District. As against the said order, the petitioners herein preferred C.M.A.No. 247 of 2007 before the Additional Agent to the Government, Bhadrachalam - 2nd respondent herein. The 2nd respondent vide order, dated 28.9.
2013 dismissed the said appeal filed by the petitioners herein while directing the Tahsildar, Kothagudem Mandal - 4th respondent herein to take possession of the property and to register a complaint in the concerned Police Station under Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Areas) Land Transfer Regulation, 1959.
stay application seeking stay of all further proceedings including eviction from the schedule land.
The grievance precisely in the present writ petition is that no orders have been passed by the 1st respondent herein either on the stay application or on the statutory revision. It is the further grievance of the petitioners herein that in the meanwhile 4th respondent - Tahsildar is taking steps to evict the petitioners from the schedule property and also trying to file a complaint as per the directions of the 2nd respondent - Additional Agent to the Government. It is also alleged in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that for the last one week the 4th respondent and his subordinates are insisting to vacate the subject land so as to assign it to the third parties. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that without there being any order of the 3rd respondent in Execution Petition, the respondents are trying to evict the petitioners from the schedule property.
As evident from the order of the 2nd respondent - Additional Agent to the Government, the 2nd respondent while dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioners herein issued directions to the Tahsildar, Kothagudem Mandal - 4th respondent herein to take over the schedule land into Government custody by evicting the persons in possession and to assign the same to the eligible Tribals under the cover of panchanama. It is also clear from the appellate order that the 2nd respondent appellate authority also directed the Tahsildar -
4th respondent herein to register a complaint in the concerned Police Station under Section 6 (A) of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Areas) Land Transfer Regulation, 1959. According to the petitioners herein, the revision and the stay application filed along with the revision are pending consideration before the 1st respondent herein and no orders have been passed on the same.
In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the considered opinion of this Court, the interest of justice would be met if a direction is given to the 1st respondent herein to dispose of the revision filed by the petitioners herein by fixing some time.
For the aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent herein to dispose of the revision, dated 30.01.2015 filed by the petitioners herein against the orders of the 2nd respondent, dated 28.09.2013 in C.M.A.No. 247 of 2007, in accordance with law, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such exercise attains finality, status quo as on today shall be maintained. There shall be no order as to costs. The Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
----------------------------- JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI DATED 23RD JUNE, 2015.
Msnrx