Petitioners sought mandamus for regularization of tank-bed shikam land in Sy.No.241, Thimmapur Village, claiming benefit under G.O.Ms.No.267. Court held the land lies in tank bed level and cannot be assigned or regularized in view of later government orders barring alienation; writ petition dismissed.
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.
[3302 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 15017 OF 2011
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Articre 226 0f rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit rireo ineiewitn, tne uilrr'co'u.t ,rv o" pleased to rssue an appropriate writ, order oi oir""iion more particurarry a writ in the nature of lVlandamus decrare ttre action-oiirr-J sro respondent in particurarry any action in pursuance of the RC.No. H5r1gt2005r4g4 dt. 26 2.2005 0f 2nd respondent and the same wa_s-issued in pursuance of riO" n"f C.ful.C;i Hy; ft" Lr'No 675/GEN/2005 dt 3.2-2oos and the s-ame [enetit under G o.Ms.No. 267, Revenue Department dt. 18.3.1g85 i. not "ii"noin"g to the petitioners is ireqar, unconstitutional, violation of Government Orders, ,irlio" ,"iirrrrri"" ii n"y"," 14 of constitution of rndia and consequenfly Jiiect *re respondents to consider the petitioners by extendino the same oenerit ,no"i'e o.vs.No. 267, Revenue Department at. tA.S.t ge5
l.A. NO: 1 oF2011(WPMP. NO: 18035 O F 20111
Petition under section 15'r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition,'*,E Hign corrt may be preased direct the respondents particurarry_ 4th responouli "not interfere with petitioners possession and enjoyment of tand of an extent oi n.. :_zo gt. i" s!.N;].i+t situated in Thimmapur Virage, Hanamkonda-man-oar,^ warangar District pending proceedings vide Ref. c.rM.ceil Hyd Lr.No.675/cErvTzoos at 3.2.2005 before the 3rd respondent
lA NO: 1 oF 2024
Petition under Section.1.51 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, ir,""n igh c-orrt.may be preased to bring the foilowing persons (1 ). Singarapu S;;th"Jr: Wife, (2) Singarapu yesudas, S/o Kornet, Son, aaed oi.yeais, 1i1. Singurr;, brnannda, W/o yohan, aged 60 petitioner and impread years, daughter-in-raw as Legar Represen"tative oi ir," r "t them as Bth to 1Oth petitioners in the above Writ Fuiii,r"
Counsel for the petitioners: SRt. G SIMHADRI
Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR ASSIGNMENT
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.15Ol7 of 2OLL
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution
of India seeking the following reliel
"... to issue an appropnate urit, order or direction more portianlarlg a urit in the nature of Mandamus declare the action of the 3rd responclent in parTicularlg anA action in pursuance of the Rc.No.Hs/ 19/2OO5/494 dated 26.02.2005 of 2nd respondent ctnd the same was issued in pursuance of uide Ref.C.M.Cell Hgd uide Lr. No.6751/ GEN/ 2OO5 doted O3.O2.2O05 and the some benertl under G.O.Ms.No.267, Reuenue Depanlment, elated 18.O3. -1985 is not extending to the petitioners ls illegal, unconstitutional, uiolotion of Gouenrment Orders, maLaJide and uiolation of Article 14 of Constitution of India and cottsequentlA direct the respondents to consider the petitioners bg extending the same benefit under G.O.Ms.No.267, Reuenue DeparTment, dated 18.03.1985..."
I I
-,_-
2
2005, dated 03.02.2005 and the same beneflt is not extending to the petitioners under G.O.Ms.No.267, Revenue Department, dated 18.03.1985 as illegal and arbitrarl,.
3
Thereafter, the said Grievance Cell directed the respondent No.2/District Collector of Warangal uide Ref.C.M.CellHyd Lr.No.6751/GEN/ 2005, dated 03.O2.2OO5 to take immediate action on the representation of the petitioners. Asper thesaid directions of the C.M.Grievance Cell, the respondentNo.2 had directed the respondent No.3 to pass appropriate orderson the representation made by the petitioners. In view of inactionof the respondents, the petitioners hled the presentwrit petition requesting to direct the respondents to consider thecase of the petitioners for regularization of their iands asper G.O.Ms.No.267, Revenue Department, dated18.03. 1985
.!-
4
G.O.Ms.No.267, Revenue Department, dated 18.03.19g5, thereafter, The Government of A.p. uide G.O.Ms.no. i57, Revenue (R) Deptt, dated 13.02.19g7 had issued (ASN.I) Deptt., Memo No.51SO/Asn.I(1)/98-1, dated O2.Og.7gg8 & Memo No.6596 1/Asn.l(1)97-lt dated Og.O2.lggg, wherein ir had ordered as follows:
I No cultivation should be allowed in the tank bed area under any circumstalces,
11 No lease of the tank bed lands including the lands laying beyond the full tank level (FTL) either on eksal basis or for a longer periocl after the Expiry of the subsisting leases should be allowed and
111 No lresh leases of Tank bed lands should be gran ted 1n future even during the drought yea rs.
5
I (
value in thevicinity of the land and the petitioners are not cultivatingin the land in Sy'No241 (Bestham Cheru'"r-r Shikam) as the Governmenthad banned the cultivation of shikam lands and alsobanned the sanctioning of .eksal,pattasto the poor people in shikamlands long back'He further submits that the HanamkondaMandalitself is an urban Mandal and all the villages thereinare being merged toWarangalGreater MunicipalityCorporationand requested to dismiss the writ petition asthere are no vatid grounds for considering the case of the Pettttoners.
6
lssued Memos uide Government of A.p. (ASN r) Deptr., Memo No.5 i S0/As n.I(t) / 98J, dated 02.09.1998 & Memo No.65961/ Asn.I(1)97-II dated 09.O2.1999, directing not to alienate the shikam lands to anyone. Moreover, admittedly, the land of the petitioners is in the tank bed level, which cannol be assigned or regularized in larzour of the petitioners. Even in view of the recent judgments passed by the Hon,Lrre Apex court a.d as we, this Court. the case of the petitioners cannot consider for regularization and there are no merits to consider the case of the petitioners for regularizing the suit schedule lald and the same is lialtle to be dismissed.
8 Accorclingly, the Writ petition is dismissed 'Ihere shall be no order as to costs.
SD/- A.V.S.PRASAD ASSISTANT.\ GISTRAR //TRUE COPY//
To,
v SECIlON OFFICER
1 One CC to SRt. G S|MHADR| Advocate tOpUCl 2 to GP FoR ASSIGNMENT, High court for the State of Teransana ff,ir?"t a Two CD Copies KKS BSR
u
l )
HIGH COURT
DATED:1211212024
ORDER
:a?
Ar€
.)
e
2
a
[4 rrl 2825
/t,
L- l: Fr.,.\ . 6u( o ,
WP.No.15017 of 2011
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION
WITHOUT COSTS
5
\ <br>
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners were entitled to regularization/assignment of Ac.5.00 guntas of 'Bestham Cheruvu Shikam' tank-bed land under G.O.Ms.No.267 dated 18.03.1985.
Whether refusal to extend that benefit violated Article 14.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Singarapu Kornel
Singarapu Kiran Kumar
Singarapu Yohan
Singarapu Ashaiah
Singarapu Rajaiah
Singarapu Arogyam
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
