Dismissed

Jarpula Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Feb 2022WP/6787/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a writ petition alleging illegal interference with his peaceful possession of agricultural land by forest and revenue respondents. The respondent assured the petitioner not to interfere with his possession but restrained him from encroaching on surrounding forest land, directing factual disputes to the civil courts.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed not to encroach upon surrounding forest land and was assured against interference by respondents regarding his possession.

Jarpula Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original J urisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶6

RIT PETITION NO: 6 87 0F 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

J?rpula. Sdnivas, S/o Baddu aged 35 years, Occ. Agriculture, Fvo Thumbai ThandaVillage, Samsthan NaraySnpuram-l,4andal, yadad'ri anongir. Oistrici.^--

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

2 The District Collector, Yadadri Bhongir District

¶13

J The District Forest Officer, Yadadri-Bhongiri District, Erstwhile Nalgonda District 4 The Revenue Divisional OfFicer, Choutuppal Divison, yadadri-Bhongiri District, Erstwhile Nalgonda District

¶14

5 The Foresi Range Oficer, Choutuppal Forest Range, yadadrlBhongiri District, Erstwhile Naloonda District

¶15

6 The Tahsildar, Samsthan Narayanpur Mandal, yadadr!Bhongirj District

¶16

7 The Forest Section Offlcer, Choutuppal Forest Range, yadadri-Bhongiri Diskict, Erstwhile Nalgonda District

¶17

8 The Fores^t, Beat Officer, Choutuppat Forest Range, yadadri-Bhongiri District, Erstwhile Nalqonda District.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 to 8 in interfering into petitioner's peaceful possession in respect of the Agriculture land to an extent of Ac.2-57 cents in Sy No. 27311, situated at rhumbai rhanda, Rachakonda revenue vilrage shivar of samsthan Naraayanapuram l,4andal, Yadadri- Bhongir District erstwhile Nalgonda District, by illegally without having right or tifle, as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and violation of Arlicle 14, 1s, 21 and 30oA of constitution of lndia and consequently to direct the respondent No.5 to g for not interfere into his peaceful possession of agriculture rand in Sy. No.273t1 admeasuring Ac.2.s7 cents, situated atThumbai Thanda, Rachakonda revenue Village shivar of Samsthan Naraayanapuram Mandar,^yadadri- Bhongir District erstwhire Nargonda District.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶21

Petition under Section 15'1 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in the} affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{High Court may be pleasedto direct the} respondent No.S to I for not^{interfere into my peaceful possessionof my agriculture} Iand in Sy. No. 273i 1 admeasuring^Ac. 2.57^{cents,situatedat ThumbaiThanda.} Rachakonda revenue Village shivar of^{Samsthan Naraayanapuram lvlandal, Yadadri-} Bhongir District erstwhile^{Nalgonda District pending disposal of the writ petition.}

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRl.^{RAPOLU BHASKAR}

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.^{1,2,4,&6 GPFOR REVENUE}

¶24

Counsel for the Respondsnt Nos.3,^{5, 7 & 8: GP FOR FOREST}

¶25

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶26

t, I

¶27

THE HON'8LE Dr. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.6787 OF 2022

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner, wherein the following prayer is made:

¶31

"... pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 to 8 in interfering into the petitioner's peaceful possession in respect of the Agriculture land to an extent of Ac.2-57 cents in Sy No.27311, situated at Thumbai Thanda, Rachakonda revenue Village shivar of Samsthan Naraayanapuram lvlandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District erstwhile Nalgonda District, by illegally without having right or title, as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and violation of Article L4, 15, 2L and 3004 ot Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondent No.5 to 8 for not interfere into his peaceful possession of his agriculture land in Sy, No. 273l1 admeasuring Ac.2-57 cents, situated at Thumbai Thanda, Rachakonda revenue Village shivar of Samsthan Naraayanapuram lvlandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District erstwhile Nalgonda District to pass such other order or orders ..."

¶32

2, Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the record

¶33

The grievance of the petltioner is that the respondent Nos.3 to 8, having no manner of right whatsoever, are interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment over the land admeasuring Ac.2-57 cents in Survey No.273l1 situated at Thumbai Thanda, Rachakonda Revenue Village Sivar of Samsthan Narayanapuram Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District, and the said interference violates his rights under Articles 14, 15, 2L and 300A of the Constitution of India. The petitioner sought a direction from this Court to restrain the respondents from causing any sort of interference with^his peacefu lnossession and enjoyment over the subject property,

¶34

Dr.SA,J \'.P.No.6787 ol'2022

¶35

¶36

On the other hand, the^{learned AssistantGoveroment} Pleader for Forests, on instructions/^{would submitthat the} petitioner has got Ac.2-57 cents of land in Survey No.273l1 of Thumbai Thanda. The^petitioner is^{makingefforts to encroach the} forest land, which is surrounding his land. In fact,^{the respondent} Nos.3 to 8 did not interfere with the^{petitioner'spossession over} the land admeasuring Ac.2:57 cents in Survey No.27311^of Thumbai Thanda. It is the^petitioner who is making efforts^to encroach the forest land surrounding his land and ultimately, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition.

¶37

There is no dispute that the^petitioner is in^possession of an extent of Ac.2-57 cents of land in Survey No.273/7 situated at Thumbai Thanda, Rachakonda Revenue Village Sivar of Samsthan Narayanapuram Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District. In view of the material placed on record, the submissions made by both the sides cannot be brushed aside. The lnterest of both the parties to the litigation needs to be protected.

¶38

In view of these circumstances, the respondent Nos.3 to 8 shall not cause any interference with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land admeasuring Ac.2-57 cents in Survey No.273l1 of Thumbai Thanda, Rachakonda Revenue Village Shivar of Samsthan Narayanapuram lYandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not make any attempt or continue to make any attempt to encroach any part of the forest land surrounding his land, in any manner whatsoever. The petitioner shall confine his

¶39

Dr.SA,J W.P.N0.6787 of 2022

¶40

¶41

possession over the said land admeasuring Ac.2_57 cents in Survey No.273/l of Thumbai Thanda, Rachakonda Revenue Village Shivar of samsthan Narayanapuram Mandar, yadadri-Bhongir District. It is needless to state that in case of any dispute in relation to identity of the land, which is a factual aspect, the aggrieved party has to file a suit before the competent civil Court and seek redressal. Such factual aspect cannot be adverted to/determined by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶42

7 With the above d irections/obse rvations, the Writ petitjon is disposed oF

¶43

lvliscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶44

¶45

To,

¶46

SD/.K.SREERAMA MURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// tl'

¶47

SECTION OFFICER

¶48

The Prl Secretary, Revenue Department,state of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶49

The District Collector,^yadadri Bhongir District

¶50

The Dishict Foresl officer, yadadri-Bhongiri District, Erstwhire Nargonda District

¶51

The Revenue Divisionar officer, choutuppar Divison, yadadri-Bhongiri District, Erstwhile Nalgonda District

¶52

The Forest Ranoe officer, choutuppar Forest Range, yadadrFBhongiri District, Erstwhile Nalgoida Dislrrct

¶53

The Tahsildar, Samsthan Narayanpur lVtandat, yadadri-Bhongiri District

¶54

T The Forest section officer, choutuppar Forest Range, yadadri-Bhongiri District, Erstwhile Nalgonda District

¶55

8 The Forest Beat officer, choutuppar Forest Range, yadadri-Bhongjri District, Erstwhile Nalgonda District.

¶56

One CC to SRt RAPOLU BHASKAR Advocate IOPUC]

¶57

'10. Two CCs to cP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶58

'I 1 . Two CCs to GP FOR FOREST, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶59

Two CD Copies.

¶60

13, One spare copy.

NPJ I

HIGH COURT

*,,

DATED:08/0212022

ORDER

WP.No.6787^{of 2022}

{.
a2 f,ii;Zllu.
-->'--'

¶68

DISPOSING OF THE^{WRIT PETITION}

¶69

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶70

(00c., vn a(o_ Tdb

¶71

Jarpula Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jarpula Srinivas 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

T. Prakasa Rao, Vs The Branch Manager, Andhra Bank

Kandimalla Raghuma Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Uppari Sattaiah Vs The State of Telangana and 7 others

Sri. Bolishetty Chinna Rajaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Managing Committee Vs The State of Telangana and another

Sri. Tekumatla Lingaiah Vs The State of Telangana