This is a writ petition seeking a mandate that the taking over of the petitioner's property as ceiling surplus was illegal. The court dismissed the petition finding no merit since the Government took possession in 2006, which was undisputed due to the lack of a reply affidavit.
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 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9214 OF 2012
ORDER:
This petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to take over petitioner’s property bearing MCH No.8-1-303/7, Plot No.7 in TS.No.41/1, admeasuring 195 Sq.Yds., situated at Vivekananda Nagar, Shaikpet Village, Tolichowki, Hyderabad, as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the respondents not to take any coercive steps including taking possession of the aforesaid petitioner’s property.
The respondents filed counter affidavit stating that the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad, has declared ceiling surplus to an extent of 66, 432 Sq.Mtrs., of land against the holding of the declarants in CC.No.E/11007 to 11010/76 in TS.No.14/1 and 14/2, Block-C, Ward No.13 of Shaikpet Village, correlating to Survey No.14/p, 18 to 24, 26 to 32; that possession of the said surplus land was taken over under Section 10(6) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 on 16.03.2006 by the ULC authorities and handed over to the Deputy Tahsildar of this respondents’ office under cover panchanama on 30.07.2011 for safe custody and that since then the surplus land is in safe custody of the Government. It is also stated that during routine inspection of the Government lands and ceiling surplus lands, field staff of this respondents office noticed that some individuals including
2
the petitioner herein are trying to encroach into the said surplus land by erecting temporary huts and compound walls and their attempts were foiled by the field staff at the initial stage itself and erected a sign board displaying that the said land belongs to Government. It is further stated that the petitioner schedule land already in possession of this respondent and hence the question of taking over possession again does not arise and that this respondent has no power to allot the land to others and hence the allegations that the authorities informed that the land will be allotted to others is false and baseless.
No reply affidavit is filed by the petitioner.
Since it is stated in the counter affidavit that possession of the subject land was taken on 16.03.2006 by the ULC authorities and handed over to the Deputy Tahsildar of this respondents’ office under cover panchanama on 30.07.2011, and since the same is not disputed by the petitioner by filing reply affidavit, I do not see any merits in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition, shall stand closed.
A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
13.12.2016 t k.
3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the taking over of petitioner's property as ceiling surplus under Section 10(6) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act was illegal or arbitrary.
Whether the court should grant a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to take coercive steps regarding the property.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Respondents
Rajasheker Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
