Disposed

Raj Gonda Seva Samithi (Regd.) v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Sept 2024WP/9782/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A registered tribal welfare society sought a mandamus directing authorities to consider its representation for allotment of government land in Burhampur Village for a Komaram Bheem Bhavan and house sites for tribals. The High Court disposed of the writ petition directing respondents 2 to 6 to consider the representation in accordance with law within three weeks and communicate the decision, withou

What did the court decide?

Respondents 2 to 6 directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2013 in accordance with law and pass orders within three weeks, communicating the decision; no costs.

Raj Gonda Seva Samithi (Regd.) Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

132s21

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 9782 OF 2015

¶7

Between:

¶8

Ral Gonda Seva Samithi (Regd.), Chandpalli Village, Bela Mandal,^Adilabad DiStrict. Rep. by its President Sri Korang Daulat Rao, S/o. Sunkat^{Rao, Aged} about 60 Yrs., Occ Agriculture, R/o Chandpalli Village, Bela^{Mandal, Adilabad} District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,^{Tribal Welfare} Department, Secretariat Building, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The District Collector, Adilabad District, Adilabad.,^-

¶13

3 The Project Officer,, lntegrated Tribal^{DevelopmentAgency (ITDA) Utnoor,} Adilabad Diskict.

¶14

4 The Special Deputy Collector,,^Tribal Welfare^{Department,Utnoor, Adilabad} District.

¶15

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad^{District, Adilabad.,}

¶16

t) The Tahsildar, Bela Mandal, Adilabad^District.,-

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndiapraying thatin the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith, the High Court may be} pleased to issue an order or direction or writ more^particularly one in the^{nature of} Writ of Mandamus declaring theⁱⁿ action of^{the Respondentsin not allotting the} Iand in Sy.No. 31 of Burhampur Village, Bela^{Mandal,Adilabad District,as illegal} and arbitrary and consequently direct the^{Respondentsto considerthe} representation of the Petitioner Society dated^{23.12.2013to allot the land in} Sy No. 31.

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(W PMP. NO: 12866 OF 2015)

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^{pleased to direct} the Respondents to consider the representation of the Petitioner^Society/Raj Gonda Seva Samithi for allotment of Govt. land in Sy.No. 31^{situated at} Burhampur Village, Bela Mandal, Adilabad District,^pending final disposal^{of Writ} Petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N. ASHOK KUMAR

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.I,3 and 4: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶23

Counsel forthe Respondent No.2,5,6: GP FOR REVENUE

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

HON'BLE MRS^{JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA}

¶27

WRIT PETITION^{NO.97A2OF 2015}

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

Heard Sri^{N.AshokKumar, learned counsel appearingon} behalf of the^{petitioner,learned GovernmentPleader} for Social^{Welfare, appearing on behalf of respondent} Nos.1, 3 and^{4 and the learned GovernmentPleaderfor} Revenue, appearing^{on behalf of respondentNos'2' 5} and 6.

¶30

2 The petitioner^{approachedthe Court seeking prayer} as under:

¶31

"...to issue^{an order or directionor writ more} particularlY one in^{the nature of Writ of Mandamus} declaring^{the in action of the Respondentsin not} allotting the^{tand inSy'No'37 ofBurhampur} Village, Bela^{Mandal,Aditabad Districtas illegal'} and- arbitrary^{and consequently, direct the} Respondents^{to consider the representationof the} petitioner Society dated 23'72'2013^{to allot the} land in Sy.No'31^{and passsuch other order or} orders as this^{Hon'bleCourt may deem fit and} proper in the interest^{of Justice'"}

¶32

The case of the^{petitionerin brief is that the petitioneris} the registered^{TribalWelfare Samithi lookingafter the welfareof} the Gonda Community^{(Raj Gonda Seva Samithi)and the}

¶33

petitioner society made an application dated 23.12.2013 to the respondent No.3 to allot the Government land which is located in Sy.No.31 of Burhampur Village Bela Mandal, Adilabad District, for Komaram Bheem Bhavan and also house sites for eligible Tribals, however, the respondents did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

¶34

It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the member oF the Rajgond Seva Samithi of Bela Mandal and petitioner made a representation for allotment of Government land for girijanas, however, instead of allotting the land to the girijanas, the survey was conducted to allot the land for some sub market yard of Bela Mandal and inspite of the representation of the petitioner dated 23.12.2013 addressed to respondent No.3 herein seeking allotment of Ac.8.00 guntas of Government Land in Sy.No.31 of Burhampur Village-Ac.2.00 guntas for Komaram Bheem Bhavan & Ac.4.00 guntas for house sites for eligible girijans, no action had been initiated considering the petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2013 as on date.

¶35

Learned Assistant Government^pleader submits that the writ petition could be disposed of directing the respondents to

consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.12.2013 addressed to respondent No.3 herein seeking allotment of Government Land in Sy.No.31 of Burhampur Village of Ac.B.00 guntas-Ac.2.00 guntas for Komaram Bheem Bhavan & Ac.4.00 guntas for house sites for eligible girijans, within a reasonable period.

¶40

Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Nos.2 to 6 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.L2.2AL3 addressed to respondent No,3 herein, in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders within a period of three(3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and duly communicate the decision to the petitioner. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ

¶45

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶46

SD/. C. PRAVEEN KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / \r /

¶47

//TRUE COPY// \r SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The District Collector, Adilabad District, Adilabad., - 2 lh.9 frolegt Officer,, lntegrated Tribal Development Agency (ITDA) Utnoor, Adilabad District. 3. The Special Deputy Collector,, Tribal Welfare Department, Utnoor, Adilabad District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad District, Adilabad., - 5. The Tahsildar, Bela l\4andal, Adilabad District., - 6. One CC to Sri .N Ashok Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Social Welfare, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 8. Two CCs to The GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad[OPUC] 9. Two CD Copies TJ LS b

¶48

HIGH COURT

¶49

DATED:0410912024

¶50

ir. 1 7rE ST416
<br>t) 2 4 8[T 2U?4
.'j 0 ,i,

¶51

ORDER

¶52

WP.No.9782 of 2015

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶54

WITHOUT COSTS
(g4'
W

Raj Gonda Seva Samithi (Regd.) v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Gonda Seva Samithi (Regd.) 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. Prathista Homes Private Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana

P. Vydehi Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Vishnu Decolem Engineering and Efectrical Works, Vs The Southern Power Distribution

S.Sreenivas Vs TheAPSRTC.

S. Sreenivas Vs The Apsrtc

M.Satyanarayana Murthy Vs D.Madhavi