Katragadda Prasad, v. State Of Telangana Represented By Its Principal Secretary,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1859 OF 2017 ORDER:

The case of the petitioner is that he purchased Plot bearing No.10-B in Survey Nos.548 and 572, admeasuring 350 Sq.Yards, situated at Pakalakunta, Hamlet of Alwal Village, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District from the Nava Bharath Co-operative Housing society Limited, Regd.No.TA.346, by way of registered sale deed vide document No.2650 of 1998, dated 02.11.1998 and has been in continuous possession of the said property. While so, the Urban Land Ceiling Authorities issued notice stating that the aforesaid land comes under urban land ceiling and that the Government had taken symbolic possession of the said property. Thereafter, the petitioner made an application on 28.08.2008 under G.O.Ms.No.747, dated 18.06.2008 to the 3rd respondent for regularization of the said land by paying requisite amount.

On such application, the 3rd respondent issued Memo No.G/747/6851/08, dated 20.11.2009 directing the petitioner to submit copies of the link documents and copy of lay out. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted the said documents to the 3rd respondent on 14.04.2010 and 15.02.2011. But, the respondents have not taken any action on the application of petitioner, till today. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue on instructions submits that because of status quo orders passed by this Court in WP.Nos.32716/2011, 21144/2010, 21105/2008, 21277/2008, 15924/2008 and Writ Appeal No.1438/2009, petitioner's application could not be considered.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject land is not covered in the aforesaid writ petitions and writ appeal.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, if petitioner's lands are covered by the aforesaid writ petitions, it is for the 3rd respondents to pass orders on the representation of the petitioner intimating the said fact. Otherwise, take action on the representation of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to dispose of the representation, dated 28.08.2008 submitted by the petitioner, as indicated above. No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending, shall stand closed.

_____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 23.02.2017 tk