WP/23962/2006 of P. Stanley Vs The District Collector, on 22 December 2006

ORDER:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAOWRIT PETITION No.23962 of 2006

The two petitioners claimed to be owners of land admeasuringAcs.2.33 guntas in survey Nos.606 and 608/1 situated at KandigudaHamlet of Kapra Village of Keesara Mandal in Ranga Reddy District. As the land falls within the peripheral area of Hyderabadagglomeration under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act,1976 (“the ULC Act”, for brevity), the father of petitioners SriM.V.Panjanadhan filed an application, dated 16.06.1987, before theGovernment seeking exemption of the land under G.O.Ms.No.733,dated 31.10.1988, read with G.O.Ms.No.451, dated 07.05.1987. TheGovernment rejected the request and directed the Special Officer andCompetent Authority under the ULC Act to take action under the saidAct. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed W.P.No.19807 of1997. The same was allowed by this Court on 09.11.1999 and theappeal, being W.A.No.353 of 2000, filed by the Government, wasdismissed by the Division Bench on 19.04.2000. In pursuant thereto,the Government issued Memo No.20092/UC.II(2)/99-7, dated04.03.2003, informing the Special Officer that petitioners’ land isexempted under G.O.Ms.No.733 and the Special Officer wasrequested to address the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District andMandal Revenue Officer, Keesara, for compliance in the matter. Thereafter, the petitioners approached the respondents for conductingsurvey of the land, in vein. Therefore, they filed the present WritPetition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents tosurvey and demarcate the land immediately.

The matter was initially listed before this Court on 17.11.2006. Since then it is being adjourned to enable the learned AssistantGovernment Pleader for Revenue (General-T) to get instructions in thematter. After getting instructions, the learned Assistant GovernmentPleader submits that pursuant to the Government Memo, dated04.03.2003, the District Collector has addressed the Mandal RevenueOfficer for compliance, that the same was entrusted to AdditionalMandal Revenue Inspector (AMRI) and that as the land is covered byprofuse growth of bushes and shrubs, the AMRI under a cover ofpanchanama, dated 09.09.2006, handed over the land to the petitioners. He also submits that the petitioners were asked to clearthe land and take up jungle clearance operations for the purpose ofconducting survey by the AMRI. Therefore, he submits that there is nolaxity on the part of the respondents.

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and thelearned Assistant Government Pleader, this Court is not inclined toissue a mandamus directing the second respondent to conduct surveyimmediately. When the land is handed over to the petitioners for thepurpose of jungle clearance, it is their duty to clear the land with all thebushes and then approach the second respondent for conductingsurvey. As and when the petitioners keep the land ready free ofbushes and shrubs, the second respondent may complete the surveywithin a period of six weeks.

The Writ Petition, with the above observations, is accordinglydisposed of. No costs.

22.12.2006GJ

____________

(V.V.S.RAO, J)