Disposed

Dr Gadipalli Kanaka Raju v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC13 Dec 2024WP/35152/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pattadar sought survey and demarcation of his agricultural land adjacent to government land allotted to a waste management company. Court directed the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records to conduct survey after notice to interested parties including the Forest Department, with status quo till completion.

What did the court decide?

Survey and demarcation by Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records within two months; status quo over the subject lands till completion; no costs.

Dr Gadipalli Kanaka Raju Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 35152 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Dr Gadipalli Kanaka Raju, S/o. Laxmaiah, Aged 65 years, Occ Doctor, R/o.Doctors Qua(ers, Main Hospital, Singareni Colleries, Kothagudam.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Bhavan, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Sangareddy District, Sangareddy 3. The Tahsildar, Gummadidala Mandal, Sangareddy District. 4. The Mandal Surveyor, Gummadidala Mandal, Sangareddy District 5. The Joint Director Survey and Land Records, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad. 6- Deputy lnspector of Surveyor, Sangareddy,

¶12

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner. 8. The District Forest Officer, Sangareddy. 9. Telangana State Pollution Control Board, A-3, Paryavaran Bhavan, Sanathnagar Road, Sanathnagar lndustrial Estate, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad. 10. Hyderabad lntegrated MSW Limited, Level 1^'l B, Aurobindo I Galaxy, Hyderabad Knowledge City, Hitech City Road, Hyderabad -500 081, Telangana state

¶13

...RES'.NDENT.

¶14

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, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the inaction of the Respondents in conducting the survey of the petitioner's agricultural land in Sy. No.39/e9l 1 admeasuring Ac.20.35gts situated at Pyaranagar Village, Gummadidala Mandal, Sangareddy District (erstwhile Medak District) inspite of making F-line petition on 24.06.2024 as illegal, arbitrary, against the provisions of Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923, G.Os and circulars and also against principles of natural justice and against all settled principles of law and consequently direct the r€spondents to conduct the

¶15

survey/sub-division survey as per F-Line petition dt. 24.06.2024 in respect of petitioner's agricultural land in sy. No.39/ eg /1 admeasuring Ac.20.35gts situated at Pyaranagar Virrage, Gummadidara Mandal, sangareddy District (erstwhire Medak District)

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶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 direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents not to disposes the petitioner in respect of petltioner's agricultural land in sy. No.39/ eg /l admeasuring Ac.20.35gts situated at Pyaranagar Virrage, Gummadidara Mandal, Sangareddy District (erstwhile Medak District), without foflowing due process of law, pending disposat of the main Writ Petition

¶18

Gounsel for the Petitioner: SRl. B. CHANDRASEN REDDY REp SRI B. VAMSH]DHAR REDDY

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. ito6: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.7: SRI M. ARUN KUMAR, SC FOR GHMC

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. B: Gp FOR FOREST

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.g: SRI ZEESHAN ADNAN MOHD

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.1O: --

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.35152 of 2 024

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

.^{It is statedthat the petitioneris the ownerand possessor of the} agricultural land admeasuring Ac.2O.35 gts., in Sy.No.39/el/ l, situated at $aranagar Village, Gummadidala Mandal, Sangareddy District, having purchased the same under a registered sale deed bearing document No.2145 of 7994, dated 11.10. 1994. It is also stated that his name has been recorded in the revenue records and pattadar passbook and title deed has also been issued in his favour in respect of the subject property uide passbook No.T09030O30139 Khata No.6O089. It is further stated that he is receiving various incentives as investment subsidies sanctioned by the Government under various schemes and he is in active cultivation of the said land.

¶29

Cbnsidered the submissions of the. learned counsel for the respective parties and with their consent this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

¶30

Sri B. Chandrasen Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that adjacent to the petitioner,s patta land, an extent of Ac.152.OO gts., of land is recorded as government land in all the revenue records and the same is allotted to respondent No. 1O and in the guise of the same, respondent No. 1O and

¶31

its agency are frequently interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the subject lands disputing that the said lands are forming part of the allotted lands. It is further contended that the respondent authorities, without conducting survey and demarcation of the said lands with clear boundaries and localisation of the same, are frequently making efforts to encroach upon the petitioner's lands.

¶32

Since it is fairly submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has made an online application seeking to conduct survey and fix the boundaries and for demarcation of the subject lands and since it is the case of the petitioner that he is the pattadar and possessor of the subject lands and his name is also recorded in the revenue records as pattadar and possessor and since there is dispute with regard to the part of the lands adjacent to his lands, which were allotted to respondent No.10 and respondent No.1O is making efforts to encroach upon the lands of the petitioner on ttre giound thLtl the State has allotted land to an extent of Ac.152.OO gts., to it, this Court without expressing any opinion on the right and entitlement of the petitioner over the subject lands and to put a quietus to the litigation, is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records is directed to conduct the survey and demarcation of the subject lands after issuing notice to the petitioner and all interested persons

¶33

::3::

¶34

¶35

' including Forest Department as the subject lands are adjacent to the forest land, on the expenses/costs being incurred by the petitioner for fixing boundary stones/kaddies, and furnish a copy of the survey report along with the Tonch map to the petitioner, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved with the said survey report, he is at liberty to avail the remedies as available under law. Till survey and demarcation as directed above is completed, both the parties are directed to maintain status quo over the subject lands in all respects.

¶36

With the above directions, this Writ petition is disposed of.

¶37

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed. No costs.

¶38

To,

¶39

//TRUE COPY//

¶40

Sd/. A. V. S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶41

SECTION OFFICER

¶42

I i::..J,l,ffl:?i3ifi1r13lluff*nue Departmenr' Dr B R' Ambedkar Bhavan,

¶43

iii;?.rii:1,","sm:a;,,.t:l:g5ln:?:onff^"s,1tn", i'is'|u'urr'

¶44

![i!["*i,3:r:5".1i,s;ffi T{,,.,fr til:s:ll:,"",tj.:^j'ltfJ",,o"o I^{Depuly Inspectorof Surv'evor.} sanoaiJir-v'| / rhe Greater Hvderabad Mlnicipar eorpor;iion, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner.

¶45

The District Forest Officer, Sanoareddv.

¶46

l elangana State Pollution.Contiot.Aoa'rO, n_:, paryavaran Bhavan, ,, EilEi!FqiiEai":''na"ri5lglr'"is',:"**imr[Eiffi;^vderabad eds e ci tv' [i tnnt i ti i{o^jd' r{vbl'i""0'o -5o o bii i,

¶47

iJffiet# 5:?y

¶48

One CC to SRt. B. VAt\dsHtDHAR REDDy, Advocate IOPUCI 'l2.one CC to sRt. zEFsH^w.l.ql,r.{N y-onp, Aii,ilZEiopucf 't3.one cc to SRt. M. ARUN KUMAd, Sc-ioh ciii6Tdeucl

¶49

'14. Two CCs to Gp FoR FoRESi; Hl'gh -C"rrt'foi't';;"s[ite or Tetangana, at

¶50

Hyderabad [OUT1

¶51

Two CCs to- Gp FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Tetangana at Hyderabad [OUT'l-

¶52

Two CD Coiies

g BM

HIGH COURT

CVBR,J

DATED:1311212024

ORDER

1Y\ U 6IA I €
(,
I
2 7 .,Aii 2025 t,'
ooJ*
I
cEsPo rcvr'- l)

¶59

WP.No.3S152 o12024

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶61

.t
@)4
i?r-

Dr Gadipalli Kanaka Raju v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Gadipalli Kanaka Raju 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

M/s. Jubilee Hills Landmark Projects Private Limited Vs Telangana State Real Estate Regulatory Authority

C. Bharathi Vs The State of Telangana

Sri.K.Krishna Murthy Vs The State of Telangana

Marripally , Golla Prakash Vs State of Telangana and 3 others

Damodher Rao Vs Smt. K. Nikhila,Ias

G.Padma Latha, Vs The State of Telangana