Smt. Gannarapu Bhagya Laxmi v. The State Of Telengana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No. 46796 of 2018 O R D E R :

The case of the petitioner is that her name was removed from the column of pattadars and enjoyers in the Adangals and Pahanis in respect of land to an extent of Ac.0.34 guntas in survey No. 461/AA situated at Vellulla Village, Metpally Mandal, Jagitial District. The said aspect was noticed by the petitioner on 20.03.2018 when she verified the online records, wherein names of Respondents 5 to 7 were entered.

The assertion of the petitioner is that Respondents 5 to 7 are only her tenants and, on earlier occasion, there was a compromise decree in her favour in O.S.No. 27 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge at Metpally. In those circumstances, the petitioner challenges the entries made in the revenue records and seeks a direction to the official respondents to declare the memo dated 02.08.2018 which directed her to approach the SubCollector, Metpally by way of Appeal as arbitrary. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue supports the order dated 02.08.2018 as, with respect to any alternation in the revenue records, there is an alternative remedy of appeal to the Sub-Collector within one year and a Revision to the Joint Collector under Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971.

In view of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the Writ Petition pending as the petitioner approached this Court in spite of

there being an alternative remedy of appeal where the factual allegations of the petitioner can effectively be verified with respect to the evidence that may be produced by the respective parties. What all the petitioner projecting before this Court is only the entries reflected in the web system. It may be noted that the respondent authorities are required to make a reasoned order before affecting changes in the revenue records and as on date, no such order is passed. Hence, as and when such an order is passed the petitioner shall challenge the same by way of either Appeal or Revision.

The Writ Petition is accordingly, disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority in accordance with law.

Registry to mark a copy of this order to the Joint Collector concerned.

____________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 26th December 2018

MAIN CASE No: WRIT PETITION No. 46633 OF 2018 W.P.No. 46633 OF 2018 02.

When the Writ Petition came up for admission on 24.12.2018, in spite of the apprehension expressed by the petitioner that without following due process and without issuing any written orders, the respondents have demolished the tenement of the petitioner and that she is likely to be dispossessed even from the place where she is residing, this Court, acceding to the request of the learned Government Pleader, adjourned the matter so as to enable him to get instructions.

Today, learned counsel for the petitioner asserts that as apprehended, the respondents have completely demolished the construction of the petitioner. Inasmuch as, as on date, there is no written order passed against the petitioner, both the parties shall maintain status quo obtaining as on date.

Needless to say that the petitioner shall also not make any further construction whatsoever.

MAIN CASE No: WRIT PETITION No. 43882 OF 2018 W.P.No. 43882 OF 2018 Issue notice to the respondents.

03.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is also permitted to take out notice to the 4th respondent by Registered Post and file proof of service.

Post after six weeks.

Pending further orders, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, the 5th respondent herein shall scrupulously examine the parameters that are required to be considered, particularly keeping in view the observations of the Pollution Control Board, before taking any decision.

MAIN CASE No: WRIT PETITION No. 43882 OF 2018 W.P.No. 43882 OF 2018 03.

It is brought to the notice of this Court that in similar circumstances, this Court granted interim order in Writ Petition No.13847 of 2018 on 19.04.2018 and in Writ Petition No. 28720 of 2018 on 19.09.2018.

In view of the same and for the reasons alike in the order dated 19.04.2018, there shall be interim stay of the proceedings disabling the DIN of the petitioners. Further, the 1st respondent is directed to restore the DIN number of the petitioners, pending disposal of this Writ Petition so as to enable them to submit annual returns and financial statements of the active companies.

MAIN CASE No: WRIT PETITION No. 46602 OF 2018 W.P.No. 46602 OF 2018 02.

Since it is the assertion of the petitioner that though he holds permission to carry on construction, the 3rd respondent Tahsildar has been visiting the subject premises and obstructing the constructions, without issuing any order to that effect, in writing, the 3rd respondent shall not interfere with the same, in any manner.

MAIN CASE No: WRIT PETITION No. 46617 OF 2018 W.P.No. 46617 OF 2018 02.

The case of the petitioner is that his grandfather was originally assigned the land in an extent of Acs.2.00 in Survey No. 788/A situated at Lakshmipuram Village, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District as landless poor person and thereafter, his father in 1975 and himself in 2009, succeeded to the said property.

Since it is the allegation of the petitioner that the 4th respondent along with his subordinates came to the subject land and demanded them to vacate the same as they are proposing to allot the same to landless poor persons and since the respondent authorities are trying to cancel the pattadar passbooks and title deeds issued in respect thereof, the 4th respondent is directed not to do so, without issuing any order, in writing, to that effect.

MAIN CASE No: WRIT PETITION No. 46624 OF 2018 W.P.No. 46624 OF 2018 02.

Since it is the assertion of the petitioners that though they hold permission to carry on construction, the 3rd respondent Tahsildar has been visiting the subject premises and obstructing the constructions, without issuing any order to that effect, in writing, the 3rd respondent shall not interfere with the same, in any manner.

____________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 26th December 2018