Disposed

N.R. Giridhar Kumar, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Jan 2016WP/38550/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a writ petition filed by land purchasers challenging the requirement of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for agricultural-to-non-agricultural conversion. The court held that the petition is premature because the petitioners had not filed the requisite application or paid the fees under the relevant Act. Petitioners may now apply to the competent authority.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty to make appropriate application to the Revenue Divisional Officer. Impleaded respondent shall consider the same on merits and pass appropriate orders.

N.R. Giridhar Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana — Municipal and Town Planning | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.38550 OF 2015

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

¶5

This Writ Petition is filed alleging that the respondent authorities are insisting on production of ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) as a precondition for consideration of the petitioners’ application for conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural purpose. In their application, dated 15.12.2014, made to the Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, the

¶6

4^th respondent, the petitioners sought conversion of the land admeasuring Acs.04.25 guntas in Survey No.242/5 of Abdullapur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, into

¶7

non-agricultural use. Alleging that the 4^th respondent is insisting on production of NOC, the present Writ Petition is filed.

¶8

The petitioners state that before they purchased the subject property from an Ex-serviceman under registered sale deeds bearing Document Nos.1744 and 1745 of 2008, dated 08.04.2008, and 1309 and 1310 of 2008, dated 18.03.2008, they obtained NOC from the then Mandal Revenue Officer as early as on 31.12.1997. Therefore, the petitioners contend that NOC cannot be insisted upon for conversion of their land into non-agricultural purpose.

¶9

It is, however, noticed from the record that there is no application made by the petitioners under the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion For Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006 (for short, ‘the Act’), before the competent authority, namely,

¶10

the Revenue Divisional Officer, the 3^rd respondent herein, nor the

¶11

requisite fee is paid as required under the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Hence, at this stage, in my view, it is premature to consider as to whether NOC is necessary for conversion of the petitioners land into non-agricultural purpose.

¶12

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to make appropriate application before the 3^rd respondent under the Act and if such application is made, the 3^rd respondent shall consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, expeditiously. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶14

____________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR, J 19.01.2016 Note:- Issue C.C. in three days. (B/o) KH

N.R. Giridhar Kumar, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.R. Giridhar Kumar, v. The State of Telangana

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

Madala Sujatha Sivani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal

M.Rarnanjaneyulu, Vs The State of A.P.

Koppula Kishiore Mitra, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Alaparthi Udayasri, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Ponnaganti Rajani, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal

Chepamadugula Venkata Ramana, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal