The Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition challenging the regularization of land recorded as Government property reserved for public purpose. Consent was withheld due to prior handover for public use.
The writ petition was dismissed, and the interim order dated 27.04.2011 was vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
WRIT PETITION No.12319 of 2011
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.
2. Petitioner claims that he is the owner and possessor of house bearing M.C.No.9-2-182, admeasuring 102 square yards, situated at Pensionpura, Langerhouse, Hyderabad, on the basis of succession to his father. Petitioner states that in 2008, when he approached the GHMC for construction permission, he was informed that the land is recorded as Government land and Noobjection Certificate cannot be issued. Petitioner, therefore, submitted an application, dated 15.04.2008, to the first respondent seeking regularization under G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.02.2008. However, alleging interference and the inaction with regard to the consideration of his application under the said G.O., the present writ petition is filed.
3. Respondents 1 and 2 in the writ petition are filed a vacate petition in W.V.M.P.No.1074 of 2014 seeking to vacate the injunction order granted by this Court on 27.04.2011, whereby the respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession over the premises in question without following due process of law.
4. Counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2,
which is sworn to by the Tahsildar. It is stated that the town survey and land records were published in A.P.Gazette No.35 dated 29.05.1976, and as per the terms of the records, the property claimed by the petitioner falls in T.S.No.139, Block-D, Ward-18 of Langerhouse village, and as per TSLR, it was recorded as ‘Village’ in Col.No.10 and is recorded as ‘GVM Street and also as Government land (MCH) in Col.No.20. It is further stated that when the petitioner filed an application for regularization of land, enquiries were made and it was reported by respondent No.2 to respondent No.1 that the applicant is residing in premises No.9-2182, which is a patta land adjacent to T.S.No.139 and using the suit schedule land as court yard by opening door on the other side of the compound wall and therefore, as per the entry in T.S.L.record, it was recommended that the case of the petitioner be rejected. It is also stated that in terms of G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.02.2008, the property is recorded as GVM street and it is an objectionable land and cannot be regularized. The counter further states that on instructions of the District Collector, the advance possession of 101 square yards of land, which falls in T.S.No.139, is classified as GVM in the town survey records and is handed over to the CDPO, Hyderabad-II project on 15.03.2011 under panchanama, and since the said land is required for public purpose, the regularization under G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.02.2008, is not permissible. Since the land is already handed over, the possession claimed by the petitioner is denied and consequently, the injunction order is sought to be vacated. It is also stated that the construction of Anganwadi Centre by the ICDS
authorities on the said land is the proposed action of the Tahsildar as per the panchanama dated 15.03.2011, which is annexed to the counter affidavit along with a sketch map showing the petitioner’s premises No.9-2-182 and the site abutting the same falls under T.S.No.139, which is shown in red colour together with a copy of the town survey land register in support of the counter affidavit.
5. I have heard the learned counsel on either side including the impleaded respondent. Since the land admeasuring 101 square yards abutting to the house of the petitioner is recorded as Government land and reserved for public purpose under G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.02.2008, the same is not eligible for regularization. Further, in view of taking over possession of the said land and allotment thereof to ICDS authorities, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Interim order, dated 27.04.2011, shall stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand dismissed.
_______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J
11th July, 2014 sj
1 issue framed by the court
Whether land recorded as Government land reserved for public purpose is eligible for regularization under G.O. No.166.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
PETITIONER
RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
