N.A.Hafeez, Nalgonda Dist. v. The Dist. Collector, Nalgonda And 2 Others

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITON No.16793 of 2011 ORDER:

The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to declare the action of the respondents, in not regularising the subject land in favour of the petitioner, as arbitrary and illegal. A consequential direction is sought to the respondents to regularise his house site bearing No.133 square yards in Sy. No.247, B. Madaram Revenue village of Suryapet Town, Nalgonda District.

The petitioner claims that he made an application on 18.05.2010 to the District Sainik Welfare Officer, Nalgonda to recommend his case for regularisation; the Sainik Welfare Officer had forwarded his application vide letters dated 06.07.2010 and 01.06.2010; the District Collector had, in turn, forwarded the letter dated 27.07.2010 to the Tahsildar to enquire into the matter, and take necessary action; thereafter the Tahsildar had directed the Mandal Revenue Inspector to conduct an enquiry; as such the Mandal Revenue Inspector had conducted a panchanama, and had submitted his report to the Tahsildar on 01.02.2011 recommending his case; and, thereafter, no action was taken to regularise the petitioner's land.

In the counter-affidavit filed by the Tahsildar, it is stated that the petitioner claims regularisation of the subject land in Suryapet town; he is not residing at Suryapet but at Kodad in House No.4-114/4'; he is carrying on business in readymade garments at Kodad; he did not fulfil the requirements of G.O.Ms. No.166 dated 16.02.

regularisation was rejected vide office memo No.B/15935/2010 in July, 2011.

It is evident from the counter-affidavit that the petitioner's request, for regularisation of the subject land, was considered and rejected on the ground that he did not fulfil the conditions prescribed in G.O.Ms. No.166 dated 16.02.2008. Any grievance which the petitioner may have against the said order cannot be agitated in these proceedings, as the Writ Petition was filed before the impugned proceedings was issued rejecting his request for regularisation. Suffice it to make it clear that the order now passed by this Court shall not disable the petitioner from challenging the validity of the order, rejecting his request for regularisation, in appropriate legal proceedings. The Writ Petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs. _______________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, ACJ Date: 09.03.2018 MRKR