Telangana High Court
WP/23381/2002 of mohd, Wesim Farooqui alias Tariq Vs The Chief Executive Officer, on 22 November 2002
MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.23381 of 2000 ORDER: The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in trying to dispossess the petitioner forcibly as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner claims that he undertook
WRIT PETITION No.23381 of 2000
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a writ ofMandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in trying todispossess the petitioner forcibly as illegal and arbitrary.
The petitioner claims that he undertook the work of laying out ofroads, drainage and water lines in the layout of the fifth respondentherein. Therefore, the society and members allotted to him plotNo.122 admeasuring 180 Sq.yards situated at B…Jubilee Hills,Golconda Mandal. He allegedly constructed a pakka building andobtained electricity connection. He alleges that on 26.11.2000 someofficials visited the plot and tried to dispossess the petitioner and,therefore, the present writ petition is filed.
This Court while admitting the writ petition on 04.12.2000 passedinterim orders staying dispossession. While the interim order is inforce, >>>> Cooperative Housing Society filed two applications; onefor impleadment as respondent No.6 in the writ petition and the otherpraying this Court to vacate the interim orders. These matters arelisted today. However, having regard to the counter averments, thematter is being disposed of at the interlocutory stage.
The Special Deputy Collector (Land Protection) filed counteraffidavit on behalf of the second respondent. It is stated that the land insurvey No.139 of Shaikpet admeasuring 3288.02 Sq.yards is shownas Government land and that a supplementary Shethwari is issuedcreasing survey Nos.122/7 to 10 whereas survey No.122/1 is shownas 3,049.39 Sq.yards and survey Nos.129/2 to 129/10 together asshown as measuring 193.03 guntas. After town survey, notificationwas issued under Section 6(1) of A.P. Survey & Boundaries Act, 1923(the Act, for brevity) and that the land in question is surveyed as part of…….. counter……….. notification under Section 13 of the Act wasissued. They have become final, as nobody filed civil suit within threeyears as required under Section 14 of the Act. The land in question isthe Government and the petitioner has no right over the land. It isfurther stated that when the petitioner was trying to make constructionon plot No.12…. which is situated in a corner and as the said land wasrequired for construction of the school under Akshara Sankranthiprogramme, the petitioner was prevented from proceeding with theconstruction. It is also stated that even before the respondents could take any action for eviction from the encroachment, writ petition isfiled.
Though counter affidavit is filed on 06.8.2005, no reply affidavit isfiled. The submission of the respondents that it is a Government land,therefore, remains uncontroverted. Be that as it is, the counter affidavitdoes not deny the possession of the petitioner. Now in the counter it isstated that even before any action is taken to prevent encroachmentand constructions, the writ petition is filed. Therefore the respondentsshould initiate appropriate action under the Land Encroachments Act,1905 against the petitioner and till then he cannot be evicted from theplace if he is still in possession of the plot No.122 in survey No.402/4as alleged by the petitioner.
The writ petition, with the above observations, is disposed of. Nocosts.
July 14, 2006.
_____________
(V.V.S.RAO, J)
YS