Allowed

K.Venkat Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Feb 2024WP/30079/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice under the Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. The court found the notice defective for lacking details on assignment conditions and violation particulars.

What did the court decide?

Shooting aside the impugned show cause notice dated 06.07.2022; liberty to respondent to issue fresh notice with full details.

K.Venkat Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETIT|ON NO: 30079 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

K.Venkat Reddy, S/o.K.Buchi Reddy Aged about 57 years, Occ. Secretary AWARE R/o.H.No.14-18, P and T Colony, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabl9ir,r,or."

¶9

AND

¶10

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

¶11

The Tahsildar, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy Diskict.

¶12

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur Division, Ranga Reddy Diskict.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondent No.2 herein in passing the order purporting to be notice of resumption of land in Sy.No.56 to an extent of Acres 6-00 guntas situated at Mohabbathnagar Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District with no file number is mentioned dated.06.07.2022 as being violative of^provisions of Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Ac1.1977 as also being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300 (A) of the Constitution of lndia

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to suspend the impugned order dated.06.07.2022^pending disposal of writ^petition except in accordance with law

lA NO: 1 OF 2o23:

Between:

The State^of Telangana, Rep. by its principal Secretary, Department of Revenue Secretariat, Hyderabaij.

¶22

The Tahsildar, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶23

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District.

¶24

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kahdukur Division, Ranga Reddy District. ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶25

AND

¶26

fjygflgt_8"9.d.I,^S/o.KBuchi .Bgqdy^{Age_dabout57 years, Occ.} Secretary AWARE R/o.H.No.14-18,^p and T Cotony, Ditsukhnagar, Hydbrabad.-^{- - - -} ...RESPONOENT/PETITIONER

¶27

Petition under Section 1 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased pleased to vacate the lnterim orders dt.22lo7l2o22 in LA.NO.1 oF 2022 in w.p.No.30079 of 2o22 in the interest of the Government and assignees and ex-servicemen assignees whose lands have been grabbed by the respondenupetitioner, and constructed the compound wall illegally over the entire ceiling surplus and assigned measuring Ac.9.06 gts., in sy.No.56 of Mohabbathnagar viflage, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V. RAGHUNATH

¶29

Counsel for Respondents: AGp FOR ASSIGNMENT

¶30

The Court made the foltowing: ORDER

¶31

¶32

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.30079 oF 2022

¶33

ORDER: (ORAL)

¶34

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following

¶35

relief:

¶36

"... to issue an appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondent No.2 herein in passing the order purporting to be notice o[ resumption of land in Sy.No.56 to an extent of Acres 6-00 guntas situated at Mohabbathnagar Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District with no file number is mentioned dated 06.07.2022 as being violative of provisions of Telangana Assigned Lands (prohibition oF Transfers) Act 1977 as also being illegal arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and pass..."

¶37

Heard Mr. V. Raghunath, leamed counsel for the petitioner; leamed Assistant Government pleader for Assignment, appearing for respondents, and perused the material available on record.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned show cause notice was issued in exercise of powers under the provisions of the Telangana Assigned Lands (prohibition of rransfers) Act, 1977 (for short, 'the POT Act, 1977,). It is atteged in the show

¶39

¶40

:'1:

¶41

cause notice that petitioner has contravened the provisions under Section 3(2) olthe POT Act, 1977. Petitioner was directed to show cause within fifteen (15) days as to why he should not be evicted from the land admeasuring Acs.6-00 guntas ln Survey No.56 situated at Mohabbathnagar Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶42

Leamed counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the details of atleged assignment and as to how the provisions of the POT Act, 1977 have been violated have not been mentioned in the impugned notrce Respondent No.2 has not stated whether such assignment contains conditions of non-alienation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is a charitable organisation engaged in nonprofit services, popularly known as "AWARE". Petitioner society is working for the upliftment of the rural communities through socioeconomic programmes. Petitioner is a bonafide purchaser having purchased the subject land for valuable sale consideration. The impugned proceedings were issued after lapse of thirty three (33) years, after the date of assignment.

¶43

This Court has passed an order on 22.07.2022 by making following observations:

"This Court in number of judgments, dealing with the similar issue, has held that the authorities under the Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short, 'the Ac| 1977') and the Rules made thereunder, while issuing notice of violation of the provisions of the Act, 1977 , are required to fumish fu{l particulars and details of alleged violation as well as the details of the assignment of the subject land. But, the same is lacking in the impugned notice.

¶49

¶50

In view of the same, pending further orders there shalt be stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice."

¶51

Leamed Assistant Govemment Pieader for Assignment, appearing for respondents, has referred to the paragraph No.l I of the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.2 and submitted that the impugned show-cause notice would be withdrawn and fresh notice will be issued to the petitioner by giving details to the petitioner about the file number and other necessary particulars for conducting enquiry in the resumption proceedings under the POT Act, 1977

¶52

In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the impugned show-cause notice dated 06.07 .2022 issued by respondent No.2. However, respondent No.2 is given liberty to initiate fresh proceedings by fumishing details such as assignment proceedings, name of the assignee, conditions of assignment etc., and violation thereof, so

¶53

¶54

that the petitioner would have reasonable opportunity to effectively

¶55

defend such proceedings. There shall be no order as to costs

¶56

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in

¶57

the writ petition stand closed.

¶58

//TRUE COPY//

¶59

SD/-C.PRAVEEN^KUIWAR ASSISTANT REGTSTFAR o/

¶60

sEcTloN Srrtcen

¶61

To, '1 . The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue,^{State of Telangana'} Secretariat, HYderabad. 2. i;; i;li;iiAar]^{Hlinesnwaram Mandal, Ranga ReddvDistrict'}

¶62

g. tne Oistri"t Collector, Ranoa Reddy District' ;: iii; R;;;te-oivisionat^{ofticer,Kahdut<ur.Division,Ransa Reddv District} S. One CC to Sri^{V Raghunath Advocate} LOPqql .. 6. i; CC" t" Cp^{Foi"Assignment,High Court for the State of Telangana'} touTl

¶63

Two CD CoPies MBC

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0110212024

1 $e ST4I tr c
q
O O B FEB 202{
* +
Dr.. :; Pr .t t'?'

ORDER

WP.No.30079 ot 2022

1J
@'{
$

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶72

WITHOUT COSTS

K.Venkat Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Venkat Reddy 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nawab Mir Muzaffar Ali Khan Vs State of Telangana

Palle Chandrappa Vs The State of Telangana

Merla Naresh Vs The State of Telangana

Vangapalli Indira Vs The State of Telangana

KandulaSimhaRao Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. B.Nagesh Vs The State of Telangana