Narayan Das Bang v. The State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.23218 OF 2019 DATED : 18.12.2019 Between :

Narayan Das Bang S/o.Ram Kumar Bang, Aged about 64 yrs, Occu : Business, R/o.8-2-686/K 24, Kimtee Enclave, Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad & another .. Petitioners And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Prl.Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.

.. Respondents This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.23218 OF 2019 ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1, 3 to 5. 2.

This Writ Petition is filed praying to declare the inaction of respondents 2 to 4, in not considering the application dated 22.04.2016 made by the petitioners for regularization of land to an extent of 244 Square yards bearing House No.8-2-686/K/24, Kimtee Enclave, Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad and to declare the letter dated 23.08.2019, to receive back the amount as arbitrary.

3.

By the letter dated 23.08.2019, petitioners were informed that their request for regularization of Government land was rejected and therefore, they were advised to take back the money deposited by them.

4.

When the matter is taken up learned Government Pleader produced copy of Lr.No.D/WP/23218/2019, dated 09.12.2019, wherein, it was stated that the request of petitioners for regularization was rejected vide proceedings No.12/1438/2015 dated 27.05.2016.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners denies supply of the said order to the petitioners. Therefore, learned Government Pleader was directed to verify and ascertain as to when the order was communicated to the petitioners and whether petitioners were present on 27.05.2016.

- 3 - 6.

Learned Government Pleader submits that as of now, no information is available as to whether petitioners were present on 27.05.2016 and though there is an endorsement with dispatch stamp in the order, the dispatch number is not mentioned. 7.

A copy of the order is now furnished to learned counsel for the petitioners.

8.

Since the request of petitioners was already rejected, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their remedies against the order dated 27.05.2016, rejecting the request of petitioners for regularization. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 18th December, 2019 Rds