Disposed

K Sunita v. State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Nov 2022WP/23865/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of two writ petitions questioning the temple's refusal to allow construction of a gravel ramp for agricultural access. The court relied on a Tahsildar survey report confirming the acquisition of 1.36 acres for NH-7 and remitted the temple land boundary identification to the departments, directing petitioners to approach NH authorities for ramp construction.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to approach National Highway Authorities for executing the gravel ramp/slop with road safety mechanisms; temple land boundary identification remitted to Endowment/Revenue authorit

K Sunita Vs State of Ap — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

¶2

WRIT PETITION No. 23180 of 2021 and 23865 of 2020 COMMON ORDER:

¶3

Heard the counsel for the petitioners, the learned Senior Counsel for the writ petitioner (in the second case), the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.4/5 (in the second case) and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the 2^nd respondent in the first Writ Petition. 2. The petitioners are questioning the action of the respondent nos.4/5 (in the second case) temple in not allowing the petitioners to fill with the gravel for ramp/slope on the thoroughfare road towards the west situated in Sy.No.134/1 of Munagalapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal and District as it is totally down about 9 feet in view of the laying of the service road by the 3^rd respondent National Highway Authorities by increasing the height on par with the National Highway. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner (in the second case) submit that unless and until the petitioners are allowed to lay the slop/ramp with gravel, they cannot be in a position to use the thoroughfare

¶4

¶5

road to have an access for ingress and egress to their agricultural lands.

¶6

The 2^nd respondent Tahsildar and the 4^th respondent temple-Executive Officer filed their counters. During the course of hearing of the matter on the earlier occasions, the other learned single judge of this Court passed an order dated 30.11.2021 directing the Tahsildar, Kurnool to conduct a survey to ascertain as to the location of the land in an extent of Ac.1.36 cts acquired from the respondent nos.4/5 temple. After conducting such survey, the Tahsildar, Kurnool shall also state whether the boundaries set out in the letter, dated 02.09.2011 are correct or not. In pursuance of the said order of this Court, the Tahsildar conducted the survey and submitted a report in Rc.B.1067/2021 dated 24.12.2021 as follows:-

¶7

I submit herewith that W.P.No.23180 of 2021 was filed by Mallepogu Madanna S/o Mukeedanna and 2 others before the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Padesh at Amaravathi. Accordingly, the Hon’ble Court of Andhra Padesh in W.P.No.23180 of 2021 and 23865 of 2020 have issued orders as follows:-

¶8

“In these circumstances, the appropriate way forward would be for a direction being given the Tahsildar, Kurnool who is arrayed as

¶9

¶10

2^nd respondent in W.P.No.23180 of 2021 to conduct a survey to ascertain the location of the Ac.1.36 cts., of land acquired from the 5^th respondent temple. After conduct of such survey, the Tahsildar, Kurnool shall also state whether the boundaries set out in the letter of 02.09.2011 are correct or not”.

¶11

In this connection, the Mandal Surveyor Kurnool Urban mandal enclosing the FMB Sketch has reported that, he has proceeded to survey the land at mamidalapadh village in Sy.No.134/1 to an extent of Ac.1.06 cts., & 134/2 to an extent of Ac.2.35 cts., along with Village Revenue Assistants on 22.12.2021 at 10.40AM. At the time of Survey, the Executive Officer of Sri Madhavanjaney Swamy temple has also followed along with his office subordinate. As per the FMB sketch and revenue records the land in Sy.No.134/1 Ext:Ac.1.36 cts., is noted as “NH-7 Road Poramboke” and the Land in Sy.No.134/2 Ext:Ac.2.35 cts., is noted as “Sri Madhava Swamy Devastanam”. The entire land in Sy.No.134/1 to an extent of Ac.1.36 cts., its reported to be under possession of National Highway Authorities of India NH-7, now called as NH 44, as per field survey.

¶12

East Side: Sy.No.134/2 Ext: Ac.2.35 cts., land belongs to Sri Madhava Swamy Devasthanam.

¶13

Western Side: Munagalapadu village boundary (Sy.No.82 Dodowns site and Eenadu Printing press Compound wall).

¶14

Northern Side: Sy.No.135 of Mamidalapadu village.

¶15

¶16

Southern Side: Sy.No.133 of Mamidalapadu village.

¶17

The sketch report was also annexed to the said

¶18

report, where in Sy.No.134/1 is shown on Western side and Sy.No.134/2 was shown on Eastern side. The counter of the Talsildar also shown the details of the land in Sy.No.134/1 Mamidalapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal as follows:-

¶19

As per Re-Settlement Register:

¶20

Sl.No	Sy.No.	Extent in acres	Classification	Pattadar name in 16^thColumn	Remarks
1	134	3.03	ID	Manager for the time being of Sri Madhavaswamay pagoda forpuja

¶21

As per Webland Adangal:

¶22

Sl.No.	Sy.No.	Extent in acres	1B No	Pattadar name	Enjoyer name	Extent in acres
1	134/1	1.36	20001310	High Ways	NH 7 Road	1.36
2.	134/2	2.35	20000803	Endowment Land	Madhava Anjaneya Swamy	2.35

¶23

¶24

The then Tahsildar report vide Rc.B/2252/2011, dated 02.09.2011 it was mentioned the Mandal Surveyor has surveyed the land and fixed the boundaries of Sy.No.134/1 of Mamidalapadu village and the land to an extent of Ac 1.36 cts., was acquired and hand over to National Highways Authority of India. The boundaries are as follows:

¶25

Western side: Sy.No.82 of Munagalapadu village. This runs along with the compound wall of Enadu Press and the site of the Godwon belonging to M.Hussain Miah.

¶26

Northern side: Sy.No.135 of Mamidalapadu village.

¶27

Eastern side: Sy.No.134/2 of Mamidalapadu village belonging to Sri Madhava Swamy Devastanam land an extent of 2.35 acres.

¶28

Southern side: Sy.No.133 of Mamidalapadu village.

¶29

He further averred that as per the then Tahsildar’s present survey report, the land in an extent of Ac.1.36 cent in Sy.No.134/1 was acquired by the National Highway Authority of India and the claimed Sy.Nos.78/1, 81/1, 82/1, 83/1, of the petitioners belong to Munagalapadu village and there lies an approaching road which leads from the said village to the acquired land for the house site in Sy.No.95 which further proceeds to the petitioner land.

¶30

¶31

Even there exists a foot path with a width of 5 feet passing through the Sy.No.91 from North to South connecting the petitioner’s Survey Number. The land in the Sy.No.134 belongs to Mamidalapadu village from which the land in Sy.No.134/1 in an extent of Ac 1.36 cents has been acquired for the NH-7. There is no approach or inter connectivity road from the NH-7, laid in Mamidalapadu village. Moreover, once the land is acquired by the National Highway Authority, they will be competent for the said land and the Revenue officials have no authority on the said land.

¶32

The learned senior counsel appearing in the second case submits that there is an approach road with 30 feet width existing from above said land connecting to the National Highway (Hyderabad to Bangalore). This road was shown in various plans approved by the Government Authorities. At the time of approval of the above said layout, the Town Planning Authorities insisted that the width of the said road should be widened to 33 feet. Therefore, the land owners on both the sides of the road have left the site on either side of the road to widen the

¶33

¶34

road from 30 feet to 33 feet. The learned senior counsel also draws the attention of this Court with respect to the settlement deed of gift for charitable purpose executed on 13.07.2006 by the petitioners in favour of the Mangalampadu Gram Panchayat.

¶35

On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 4^th respondent temple submits that there is no approach road and temple is having Ac 3.41 cents and out of it, the National Highway Authority of India acquired Ac 1.36 cents for NH-7 and the balance piece of land in an extent of Ac 2.35 cents is divided and located in an extent of Ac 2.00 on the right side and Ac 0.35 cents on the left side. There is a canal road for the purpose of using bullock cart road from NH7 to Munagalapadu village canal bridge and Kurnool to Munagalapadu to Sunkesula Dam and there are two ways which are provided by the state authorities for the use of one and all including the petitioners herein. The learned Standing Counsel submits that at time of survey, the 4^th respondent was present and the Tahsildar and Surveyor have not clarified the extent of Ac.2.35 cents belonging to the temple remains on which

¶36

¶37

side and it is localization. In fact, on the one side Ac.2.00 bit is there and the other side of Munagalapadu village the remaining Ac.35 cents is in existence. This is contrary to the report of the Tahsildar. He further submitted that the Tahsildar admitted that there is no approach or inter connectivity road from the NH-7, laid in Mamidalapadu village to Munagalapadu village. Moreover, once the land is acquired by the National Highway Authority, they will be the competent for the said land and the Revenue Officials have no authority on the said land. He further submits that the Endowments Department has got the “land providing cell multi Zone-II”, Tirupathi consisting of Special Grade Deputy Collector, Two Tahsildars, and Two Surveyors in order to measure the temple lands specifically to protect the Endowment lands. He pleaded that the joint survey may be conducted with the Revenue officials along with the Endowment Lands Protection Cell in order to measure the 4^th respondent landed property in Sy.No.134 to an extent of Ac.2.35 cents, with regard to the localization of the same and identification of the same.

¶38

¶39

In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the above said report of the Tahsildar is clear and basing upon the said report dated 24.12.2021, the petitioners prayer shall be considered for the purpose of laying the gravel ramp/slop as mentioned in the main prayers of the Writ Petitions by following the road safety mechanism. For which the petitioners are directed to approach the National Highway Authorities concerned and the other authorities concerned to execute the same. In so far as the land to an extend Ac.2.35 cents as claimed by the Endowment Department, they can again take necessary steps in accordance with law for it’s identification/localisation and protection of the same.

¶40

Accordingly, both the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶41

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any,

¶42

pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶43

B. KRISHNA MOHAN, J

¶44

01.11.2022. KMS

¶45

¶46

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

¶47

WRIT PETITION No. 23180 of 2021 and 23865 of 2020 01.11.2022

¶48

KMS

K Sunita v. State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K Sunita v. State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Madukar Stone Crushers Vs the State of Andhrra Pradesh

Prahalada Enterprises Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Sarda Metals and Alloys Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mallepogu Madanna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Bande Harish Babu Vs the State of Ap

M Esu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh