Disposed

Ampaty Srinivas v. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC4 Mar 2025WP/8144/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patta holders challenged respondents' move to treat their six acres as surplus Government land and dispossess them. Noting disputed questions of fact and that possession had not been taken despite a 2022 acquisition award, the Court disposed of the writ petition leaving respondents free to act strictly in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed with liberty to respondents to take steps strictly in accordance with law before any action against petitioners; no costs; miscellaneous applications closed.

Ampaty Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³²⁵⁵ J

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY HE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRl JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶7

W T ETITION NO: 8144 OF 2015

¶8

Between:

¶9

Ampaty Srinivas, S/o. Venkataiah, Aqed 42 vears. Occ: Agricultqre, FVo. H. No.3-214, Prathapwada, Huzura6ad Town' and Mandal, Karimnagr Qistrict.

¶10

4mpaty Satish, S/q. Venkataiah, Agqq 10 yeqrs, Occ: Agricutture, FUo.3-214, Prathapwada, Huzurabad Town and Mandit, XaiimnagaiDiJtirct.'. :--

¶11

4Tpqty Suresh Kurnar, S/o. late Narsaiah, Aged 3g years, qqc: Agricr.rlture, '

¶12

ft/o. .^H_No.S-l 1 2, Frathapwada, Huzurabad town i,iq lir;niii kl"iiiiisar Qtstriql.

¶13

Ampqty-Rayi .Kqmqr, S/o. late Narsaiah, Aged 39 years, Occ: pvt. Emptoyee, !io.^{H.No.5-1!2, prathripwada, Huzuraba?} Town'^jnd' MinOat,-Xidrinen", qistriet.

¶14

lqegegtly.n/e.^{Flgt.No_.203, 1906 Hqtrey Rdise} Drive, MC-Lean,Va-2210?, IJSA Petitioners Z fi2 a are rep hy petiti6ner^"No i ftrroqinGFA, di lilie: 2.013 6nd 4-1;2014

¶15

..,PErlTfpNERl

¶16

AND

¶17

' $3:,.3fi|"itf#lffif Rep. bv its Principarsecretary, Bevenue Departmenl

¶18

The 9istrict Collector, Karimnggqr, Kqrimnagar Dislrlct.,

¶19

The Reyenug Pivisignal Officel, Karimnpgar.

¶20

]he [.4q4dal Rgvenq-e Officer, Huzurabad Mandat, fiarimn6gar.

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

Fetitiop under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstanQqs statgd in the affidayit fited therewith, the High Court may be pleased to l$sue writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in identifying the land of the petitioners to an extent of Ac, 6-00 in sy Ng. 236, Huzurabad village and Mandal, Karimnagar without

¶23

following due proc;ess of law as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their patta land and further not to take coercive steps with regard to the property of the petitioners.

¶24

I.A. NO: 1 O 015 WPMP. NO: 10731 OF 0

¶25

Pgtition under Section 151 GPC prayi4g that in the circumstances stateq in the affidavit filed in $upport of the petition, the High Court may be pleaEed direct the rgsponde4ts not to dispossgss lhg petitionerq from their patta land to an extent of Ap. 6-00 in sy Nq. 236, Huzurabad village and Mandal, Karimnagar as governnqnt lan-d and taking furthgr s19p9 with rggqld tg the ;ame pending dlspossl^of the^main w.F in the intgrest of jystice,

¶26

Counsgl for the Petitioner: MS. D. PADMAVATHI

¶27

Counsel for tfie Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶28

The^{Coqrt pqle thg following;} OBQEB

¶29

THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.8144 of 2O15

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

¶33

"to declare the action of respondents in identifging the land of the petitioners to an ertent of Ac.6-OO gts., in 5y.No.236, Huzurabad uiltage and mandal, Karimnagar without following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to dlspossess the petitioners from their patta land and further not to take coerciue steps utith regard to the propertg of the petitioners."

¶34

Heard Ms.D. Padmavathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents. Perused the record.

¶35

Facts in brief are as follows:

¶36

Petitioners herein are claiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors of land admeasuring

¶37

NVSI(,J W.P.No.S144 ot 2015

¶38

¶39

Ac.l-2O gi.s., each, total admeasuring r\c.6_OO gts., in Sy.No.236 situated at Huzurabad village and mandarl, Karimnagar district. The said lands are adjacent lands and they are in one block. They aJso submitted that it is their ancestral property and by virtue c,f succession, they got possessron of the subject property ald they are in possessio, ,f their respective shares. petitioners woulci further s,brnit that respondent No.3 rrerei, got issuecr pattedar passbook and title deecl on 26.11.1992 on condition of payment of market va-luc and aiso issued Lavuni Pattas; on 31.07.2005.

¶40

No'a' thc grievance of the petitioncrs in the present writ petition is that respondents are identifying the subject lands as surplus Government land and trying to dispossess the petitioners from the subject lands high handedly without following due procedure laid down under lau. anrl atso trying to distribute the same to the landless poor beneficiaries which is contrarv to the

¶41

NVSK,J w.P.No.8l44 of 2015

¶42

¶43

;7^..',,.

¶44

Revenue records. Questioning the action of respondents, petitioners herein filed the present writ petition.

¶45

4 Respondent No.4 liled counter stating that the land in Sy.No.236 situated at Huzurabad is Government Baachari Land to an extent of Ac.2l-32 gts. It is also submitted that forefathers, fathers and petitioners herein hails from Huzurabad town. Father of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 herein and father of petitioner Nos.3 and 4, ,*-ho are brothers, worked as employees in Revenue Department and Panchayat Raj Department, Karimnagar district respectively and they retired from service after attaining the age of superannuation.

¶46

It is also stated that as per G.O.Ms.No.38 Revenue dated 23.01.1973, the minor children and unmarried persons, who are not having separate family are not eligible for assignment of Government lands. The dates of births of petitioners herein are on 05. 10. 197 1, 04.05.1973, 10.06 .1975 and 06.04. 1973 respectively. It is

¶47

¶48

¶49

NVSI(,J W.P.No.8I44 of 2015

¶50

further submitted that by taking advaltage of their employment. the father of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 arrrd father of peritioner Nos.3 and 4 herein, rr"'hile they were working as [)eput5r Tahsildar in Revenue Department and VilJ.age f)evelopment Officcr ire Panchayat Raj Department respectively managed to get the provisional assignrnent patta certihcates in lavour of petitioners herein, who are their sons, for Ac. i-20 gts., each of Government Balchari land 1n Sy.No.236 of Huzurabad vide Ref.No.Ell486217991 dated 26.11.t992 and Nil reference, dated 26.03. 1993 respectively without approval of the Revenrie Divisional Officer, Karimnagar. Therefore, there is no clear approval of the Revenue Divisional Ofhcer, Karirnnagar and that some irregularities have been taken up in issuing aforesaid certificates

¶51

It is further submitted that the assignrnent of patta certificates will be issued in the matter of assignment of Government land after approval by the Assignment

¶52

NVSK,J W.P.No.8 t44 of 2015

¶53

¶54

Review Committee and as on the date of assignment petitioners herein were living with their parents, who were working as Government employees and that there is no separate family, therefore, they are not eligible for assignment. In view of the same, the issuance of Patta Certificates in favour of petitioners herein on 26.L1.1992 and26.03.1993 was irregular. It is further submitted that father of petitioner Nos.l and 2 had managed to obtain final assignment patta certificates with an intention to sell away the valuable Government land and played mischief. It is further submitted that petitioner No.3 herein is a Government employee at present and petitioner No.4 is working as employee in USA and all the petitioners are well settled and financially sound, as such, being the sons of retired Government employees assignments made to the petitioners herein is irregular and not in accordance with law.

¶55

NVSK,J W.P.No-8144 of 2015

¶56

¶57

It is lurther submitted in the counter afhdavit that petitioners herein have illegally occupied Ac.6_OO gts., of Government land in Sy.No.236 situated at Huzurabad village and enjoying the same. It is further submitted that after follo*':Lng due procedure only further action in the matter wiil be initiated, therefore, prays to dismiss the present.

¶58

Petitiorrers l-rerein have hled reply to the counter filed by respondcnt No.4 denying the averments made in the counter. Lezrrned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed a (.opy of Land Acquisition Award, dated 22.04.2022 issued by the Competent Authority, Land Acquisition aLnd Revenue Divisional Oflicer, Huzurabad, wherein it is stated that an extent of lald of 2200.4g Sq. meters each u,as acquired from petitioner Nos. I and 2 and an extent of land of 44OO.96 Sq. meters was acquired from petitionr:r No.3 herein and compensation amount

¶59

\ \

¶60

NVSK,J W.P.No.8144 ot 2015

I I

was sanctioned. But, possession of land was not taken, till date.

¶65

9: Perusa-l of record would reveal that this Court on 27.O3.2O15 granted sfatus quo and the said interim order was made absolute on 24.06.2024. ln Land Acquisition Award, dated 22.04.2022 several acres of land in various survey numbers including Sy.No.236 of Huzurabad village, in which the land of petitioners herein was situated, was acquired vide Land Acquisition Case No.B/2709/2O2O and compensation was awarded. But, possession was not taken from the petitioners, till date. Therefore, in view of disputed questions of fact and in view of the aforesaid submissions that since the possession of land was not taken, till date, this Writ Petition is liable to be disposed of leaving it open to the respondents to take appropriate steps, in accordance with law, before initiation of any action against the petitioners.

¶66

NVSK,J w.P-No.8 t 44 of 20 15

¶67

¶68

¶69

1(). Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed^of granting libe'rty to the respondents to take appropriate steps by strictly following the^procedure in^accordance with law before initiation of any action^{against the}

¶70

petitioners. There shall be no order as to^costs.

¶71

Miscellaneous applications, if any^{pending,shall}

¶72

stand closed

¶73

SD/-N. S IHARI ASSISTANT REG TRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The State^{of Telangana'Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Revenue Department} Secretariat,^HYderabad.

¶78

The District^{Collector, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District'}

¶79

The^{Revenue Divisional Officer, Karimnagar',-}

¶80

The Mandal^{Revenue Officer, Huzurabad Mandal, Karimnagar'}

¶81

Qne CC to^{Ms D. Padmavathi,AdvocateTOPUCI}

¶82

Two CQs to^{GF' for Revenue,Highcourt for the slate of Telangana,at} Hydeiabpd [OUr]

¶83

Two CD^Copies

TJ BS s

HIGH COURT

DATED:0410312025

ORDER

WP.No.81 44 of 2015

/c
)
)e
P?
o,J I I APii 2[25
J
-i
-t - * .../
{' * 11: 5,vii'u-;:'z

¶90

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶91

WITHOUT COSTS

¶92

(9qf W

Ampaty Srinivas v. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ampaty Srinivas v. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

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

Muthyam Ramesh Vs The State of Telangana

Venkat Ramana Sathvai Vs Smt. a. Sreee Devi

Khaja Moinuddin Vs State of Telangana

Mr. Madala Sriram Bhaskar Vs The State of Telangana

Kammari Venkateham Vs The Tahsildar,Regode Mandal, Medak District

Mohammad Abdul Saleem Vs the State of Telangana