Disposed

Bomma Ramakotaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC30 Oct 2019WP/14124/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the District Collector to clarify whether Paloncha Revenue Village is part of an agency area and to issue directions to the Tahsildar regarding the petitioner's application for a pattadar pass book within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Collector to clarify the status of Paloncha Revenue Village regarding agency area and issue directions to the Tahsildar within six weeks.

Bomma Ramakotaiah Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO.14124 OF 2019

¶3

Date: 30.10.2019

¶4

Between:

¶5

Bomma Ramakotaiah, S/o.Late Veeraiah, Aged 57 yrs, Occu : Agrl. R/o.H.No.8-2-458, Pilot Colony Road, Bandarugudem, Manuguru Municipality and Manuguru Mandal Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶6

And

¶7

The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.

¶8

The Court made the following:

¶9

¶10

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.14124 OF 2019

¶11

ORDER:

¶12

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

¶13

Petitioner claims to be the owner of land to an extent of Ac.2-00 in Sy.No.444/1/4 and Ac.2-20 guntas in Sy.No.444/1/144 of Paloncha Revenue Village, Sakaram Banjara, Palvancha Municipality and Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. He made application on 06.02.2019 to the Tahsildar for issuance of pattadar pass book. On his application, the Tahsildar-3^rd respondent referred the matter to the District Collector-2^nd respondent to clarify as to whether Paloncha Village is forming part of an agency area. On 02.03.2019 petitioner made detailed representation to the District Collector requesting him to issue directions to the Tahsildar to entertain the application of the petitioner by clarifying the Tahsildar, that Paloncha Mandal, does not come under the schedule area. On the representation made by the petitioner, the District Collector, without looking into the earlier letter of the Tahsildar, has asked him to consider the request of petitioner.

¶14

Since a representation is made to the District Collector-2^nd respondent, the 2^nd respondent is directed to look into the grievance of petitioner and to clarify with reference to the status of Paloncha Revenue Village/Paloncha Municipality/Paloncha Mandal, as to whether it forms part of agency area and issue suitable directions to the Tahsildar on the issue of granting of pattadar pass books. The 2^nd respondent is directed to consider

¶15

¶16

the issue objectively and take decision, since there is possibility of several such claims coming up before him or before the Tahsildar concerned. A decision shall be taken and communicated to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶17

With the above directions the Writ Petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶18

___________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 30^th October, 2019 Rds

Bomma Ramakotaiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bomma Ramakotaiah 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr.Thota Srihari Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Thimmappa Kamble Prathap Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Anugu Chinna Reddy Vs The Govt. of Telangana

Pandi Krishnaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Macherla Chinna Venkataiah and 3 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 8 Others

Bairoju Chilukamma Vs State Govt. of Telangana and 3 Others