Dismissed

Chella Krishna Murthy, S/o Pedda Veeranna v. The District Collector, East Godavari

Telangana HC28 Apr 2014WP/608/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed by a tenant of a temple against eviction from government-acquired land was dismissed. The court held the petitioner had no vested right due to lease restrictions and upheld the government's acquisition and possession.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.

Chella Krishna Murthy, S/o Pedda Veeranna… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION NO.608 OF 2004

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land in Survey No.372/3 to an extent of 2.16 acres and in an extent of 79 cents in Survey No.373/2 of Alamuru village, Alamuru Mandal, East Godavari District is arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.456 dated 29.09.1995 and violative of Article 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the said land without initiating land acquisition and/or other appropriate proceedings contemplated under law.

¶4

2) The petitioner became a successful bidder in the public auction conducted on 22.05.1978 and since then he has been cultivating the land along with 4^th respondent. On coming to know about the proposal of the respondents 1 to 3 to evict the petitioner from the land under his cultivation and distribute the said land as house site pattas, questioning the same present Writ Petition has been filed.

¶5

3) A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2^nd respondentRevenue Divisional Officer, Rajahmundry stating that the petitioner was not in possession of the land as claimed by him and the land has been taken possession from the 4^th respondent-temple on 16.03.1996 itself by paying 80% compensation of Rs.4,70,400/- and also by following the procedure laid down in the Land Acquisition Act, and in terms of G.O.Ms.No.456, dated 29.09.1995. Further compensation of Rs.3,35,600/- was also came to be paid as final settlement to the 4^th respondent-temple and petitioner filed A.T.C. No.16 of 1996 on the file of Tenancy Tribunal, Alamuru and the same was dismissed on 20.04.1999. Petitioner also filed O.S.No.38 of 2001 seeking injunction, but no injunction was granted and further Writ Petition No.5879 of 1996 filed by

¶6

the petitioner was also dismissed by this Court on 20.04.1998. The petitioner has no vested right in the lands and as such prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶7

4) Similar submissions were made by Sri Rama Rao on behalf of Sri V.T.M. Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for 4^th respondenttemple.

¶8

5) In the facts of the case, the question which falls for consideration is, Whether the petitioner is entitled for the relief sought for in the writ petition?

¶9

6) Admittedly, the petitioner is only a tenant of 4^th respondenttemple and in terms of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987 and Rules thereunder, the leasing of agricultural lands can be given for a maximum period of three years and the same will have to be granted only through public auction. However, for some reason or the other, petitioner came to enjoy the lands all these years starting from 1978. In other words, there is no vested right in the petitioner to seek the enjoyment of the lands in perpetuity. A proposal of the Government to acquire the land by paying compensation has been challenged and the same has been upheld, and the categorical statement of the respondents that the said land has been taken possession by the Government on 15/16.03.1996 itself has not been denied by the petitioner by filing a rebuttal affidavit. In those circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as prayed for in the writ petition.

¶10

7) Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.

¶11

___________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶12

Date:28.04.2014. Ssv

¶13

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶14

WRIT PETITION NO.608 OF 2004

¶15

DATE: 2 8 TH APRIL, 2014.