S.Raju Naik v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.29100 OF 2017 DATED : 30.08.2017 Between :

S. Raju Naik S/o.Pomala Naik, R/o.4208, MIG, Phase-II, BHEL, Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad & others.

..

Petitioners And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.

.. Respondents This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.29100 OF 2017 ORDER :

Heard.

2.

Petitioners claim that as agreed by the Government, they were to be given permanent allotment of land on payment of market value as originally determined. But contrary to the earlier determination, proposals are now submitted by the District Collector to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, suggesting for demand of appropriate percentage of market value as determined in G.O.Ms.No.59 dated 30.12.2014 based on the extent of plot claimed by the petitioners and such action is illegal and would be causing lot of financial burden on the petitioners. 3.

A bare perusal of the letter which is impugned in the writ petition, it is seen that it is a proposal sent by the District Collector to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration of what amount should be demanded from the petitioners to allot the land as claimed by them. It being an internal correspondence between two authorities of the State, no cause of action would arise to the person to challenge the said letter. Ultimately it is for the Chief Commissioner, to accept the said proposal or to take a decision otherwise. The grievance would arise to the aggrieved party, if a decision is taken and the same is communicated. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners sought to contend that the issue has been pending for quiet long time and petitioners are suffering on account of delay in taking decision, as the District Collector alone is competent, he ought not to have addressed letter

- 3 - or send proposal to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration.

These are the matters which are to be independently considered in appropriate proceedings, as and when the grievance is ventilated on those issues. For the present the only issue for consideration is can an internal correspondence between two authorities of the State would give rise to cause of action for this Court to entertain the writ petition and adjudicate the issue.

5.

I am of the considered opinion that no internal correspondence can give rise to cause of action to institute the writ petition and on this sole ground, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their grievance independently. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 30th August, 2017 Rds