N.Purshotham Reddy v. The State Of Telangana.,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.34584 OF 2015 ORDER:

Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

The petitioner is aggrieved by endorsement No.E/07/39/2015, dated 31.08.2015, given by the Tahsildar, Shaikpet Mandal, Hyderabad, the 4th respondent, whereunder his request for regularisation was accepted under G.O.Ms.No.59, dated 30.12.2014, directing him to deposit the balance amount of Rs.2,37,57,500/- by 31.12.2015 and failure to deposit the said amount as per the schedule fixed would result in disentitling the petitioner from seeking regularisation. The petitioner questions the said endorsement only with regard to the quantum of demand by the 4th respondent, on the ground that the regularisation relates to only 52 sq. yards of land and not for 370 sq. yards as is shown in the impugned endorsement.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner also states that taking into account the amount already paid by the petitioner, the balance amount cannot be to a tune of about Rs.2.50 crores, as shown in the impugned endorsement.

In similar matters, which were earlier considered by this Court, it was noticed that there is a Grievance Redressal Authority notified under the said G.O., and under Clause xiv thereof, the petitioner can as well approach such authority, who is entitled to look into his grievance and issue appropriate directions to the concerned Committee. In order to establish his bona fides, it is appropriate to direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- with the 4th respondent on or before

12.11.2015. However, it is made clear that such deposit shall be subject to final orders and adjudication, if any, as would be made by the Grievance Redressal Authority and if any shortfall is found due and payable, the petitioner would have to make such payments. Similarly, if the amount of regularisation works out to less than the amount deposited by the petitioner, he would be entitled to refund of the excess amount.

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

____________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR, J 14.10.2015 KH