Allowed

Palugumidi Satyanarayana and another v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Telangana HC1 Feb 2022WP/5122/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed regarding the inaction of revenue authorities in demarcating specific land extents in Wanaparthy District. Directing the relevant officials to expedite the survey and demarcation of the petitioners' lands pending further applications.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to complete survey/demarcation of petitioners' lands within eight weeks, following notice to neighbouring landowners.

Palugumidi Satyanarayana and another Vs The State of… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT F

¶2

T#HI6I5,35 I5lsji8fli^{Ar HYDERABAD}

¶3

TUES AY THE FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TW THOUSAND AND TWEN TYTWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOU+ABLE SRTJUSTTCE A. ABH|SHEK REDDY

¶6

WR|T^pETtTtON NO: 5122 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

Palugumidi Sa tyanar yana, S/o Bichanna, Aged 60 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o

¶9

D.N o. 2-1l1 , Goplap r Village, Pangal lVand al, Wanaparthy Distric

¶10

2 A.Thirupathaiah, S/o atyanarayana, Aged 26 years, Occ Agriculture, Fl/o D, No 2-1l1 , Goplapur Villa s , Pangal [/andal, Wanaparthy District:

¶11

...PETTTTONER(S)

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telanga a, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Depadment, Secretar at, Hyderabad

¶14

The District Collector, Wanaparthy Wanaparthy District

¶15

The lnspector of Surv y/The District Survey Officer, The District Survey and Land Records Wana rthy, Wanaparthy District

¶16

4 The Tahsildar, Panga l\rlandal, Wanaparthy District

¶17

5 The lr/andal Surveyor Pangal tr,4andal, Wanaaprthy District.

¶18

,..RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Articl 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in th affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased to issue a Writ, Order or irection more^particularly one in the nature of Writ of It4andamus to decla ring th action of the respondent in not demarcating the lands of the Petitioners situated in y. No. 61/2/3 for an extent of Ac. 2.19 guntas and Sy.No 61121112 for an extent ot Ac.1 .'1 0 guntas situated at Goplapur Village, Pangal Mandal, Wanaparthy Di trict as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and co nseq uently direct the re ondents demarcate the lands of the Petitioners situated in Sy. No. 611213 for an ex ent of Ac. 2.19^guntas and Sy.No 61121112 for an extent of Ac.1 ,1 0 guntas situated t Goplapur Village, Pangal Mandal, Wanaparthy District in pursuance of the ap lications made by the^petitioners in application^No AOD022100037578 and A oo22100037579

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶21

Petition under Secti n 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in suppo of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct the respondents not to irect the respondents to demarcate the lands of the Petitioners situated in Sy No. 61/2/3 for an extent of Ac. 2.19^guntas and Sy.No 61121112 for an extent of Ac. 1 .1 0 guntas situated at Goplapur Village, Pangal

¶22

applications^{made bY the}

¶23

Mandal,^{WanaparthyDistrict in pursuanceof the} AOD0221^{00037579Pending}

¶24

petitioners in^{application No AOD022100037578and} disposal of^{the writ} Petition

¶25

Counsel^{for the Petitioners: SRI' L V S NAGARAJU}

¶26

Counsel forthe^{Respondents:GP FOR REVENUE (TG)}

¶27

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶28

-ll

¶29

t* '.^.'

¶30

THE H N'BLE SRI JUS?ICE A. AB}IISHEI( REDDY WRIT PETITIoN No. 5122 of 2022

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

Hearci le ned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government p1e i der for Revenue for the respondents. With their consent, the Wr t Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

¶33

Aggri ed by the inaction of the respondents in conducting cle arcation of the lands of the petitioners admeasuring A s.2-19 guntas in survey No.6ll2/3 and Ac.1-10 guntas in surve No.61l2l 1/ 2 situated at Gopalpur Vi11age, pangal Mandal, Wanap rthy District, the present writ petition is filed.

¶34

The 1e ed Government Pleader for Revenue has stated that responden Nos.4 and 5 will take necessary steps on the F-line applicati Nos.AOD022100037578 dated 09.06.2021 and AOD022100037 79 dated 09.06.2021 filed by the petitioners, in accordance with 1au,

¶35

In vie of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Nos.4 and 5 to complete the survey/ sub-division/de arcation, pursuant to the F-line application Nos.AODO22 10 o37574 dated 09.06.2021 and AOD022100037 79 dated 09.06.2021 filed by the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, preferabiy within a period of eight weeks lrom the date o receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to mention that b ore u r-rdertaking any survey, the authorities shal1 put the petitio ers as well as the neighbouring landowners on

¶36

notice,^{and take into account the work memos' if any' filed by any} of the^partles.

¶37

Consequently,miscellaneouspetitionspending,ifany,shall

¶38

stand closed.^{Noorderas to costs.}

¶39

i I

¶40

SD/.K.ONESIM

¶41

ASSISTANT^REGISTBM

¶42

//TRUE^COPY// sEcrroNkarcER

¶43

To,

¶44

The Principal^{Secretary, Revenue Department' Secretariat' State of Telangana'} at Hyderabad.

¶45

The District^{Collector, Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District'}

¶46

3.ThelnsoectorofSurvey/TheDistrictSurveyofficer,TheDistrictSurveyand

¶47

i"na ne"ords Wanapahhy, Wanaparthy District'

¶48

The Tahsildar,^{Pangal Mandal,Wanaparthy District'}

¶49

The Mandal^{Surveyor,PangatlVlandal,Wanaaprthy District'}

¶50

One CC to SRl.^{L V S NAGARAJU, AdvocateIOPUCI}

¶51

T.TwoCcStoGPFoRREVENUE,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad.[OUT]

¶52

B. Two CD Copies

¶53

One Spare^CoPY

Chs

NPJ

it"

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0110212022

,tr

q r.r- o lAIi-'
,/, "({
A
oo) 0I FiB 20?2
'.,,i

ORDER

WP.No.S122 ot 2022

\
N\ <br>

DISPOSSSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COST

Palugumidi Satyanarayana and another v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Palugumidi Satyanarayana and another v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

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

Putta Raghava Reddy and another Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others

Kutumbaka Phani and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Bathini Yadagiri and another Vs The State of Telangana and 6 others

Smt. K. Bala Kistamma Vs The State of Telangana

Kammari Manemma Vs The State of Telangana

Viswanatham Vs The State of Telangana