M/S Sree Sai Balaji Developers, v. The State Of Telangana, Rep. By The Principal Secretary,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * WRIT PETITION No. 34227 of 2015 BETWEEN M/s.Sree Sai Balaji Developers, Partnership Firm, Rep. by its Managing Partner and another ... PETITIONER AND The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary and others ...RESPONDENTS Date of Order pronounced: 14.10.2015 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether his Lordship wish to see the Yes/No fair copy of the Judgment?

ORDER:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned government pleader for Revenue.

2. Petitioners question the impugned notice given by the second

respondent in File No.B/2753/2015 dated 21.09.2015 wherein petitioners were directed to restore the illegally encroached road Naxa Bata within 15 days. Petitioners state that there is no encroachment by them and that they have filed a detailed representation dated 13.07.2015 before the second respondent explaining that they have themselves given alternative way to the villagers. However, none of these things were considered and straight away the impugned orders are passed.

3. Learned government pleader for Revenue, who has taken notice, states that on the available record the second respondent has passed the aforesaid order, but if the said order is not complied with the second respondent will give appropriate notice and take appropriate further action in accordance with law.

4. Since it is evident that the impugned order is passed without any prior notice and merely based upon the report of the Mandal Surveyor, a direction to evict the petitioners on the ground that they are alleged encroachers in the road NaxaBata cannot be approved.

If there is really an encroachment by the petitioners, the second respondent can always take action under A.P. Land Encroachment Act and follow the procedure prescribed, which includes giving notice to the petitioners, giving them opportunity to submit explanation and then take appropriate decision in the matter. The present impugned notice, therefore, is liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside.

With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J October 14, 2015 LMV