WP/30703/2010 of Sri Rajendra Kumar Tarmakdas, (Died as per LRs P3 to 6) Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2024

1. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue DepartmentSecretariat, Hyderabad.Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Joint Collector, Hyderabad District, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, HyderabadThe Joint Collector, Hyderabad District, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, Hyderabad

3. The Tahsildar, Asifnagar Mandal, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad.Tahsildar, Asifnagar Mandal, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to pass an order, issue a writ or any other direction in the nature of writ,more particularly writ of mandamus declaring the acts of the respondents indemanding the petitioners to vacate their property bearing municipal Nos.13-6-463and 464, admeasuring 929.99 and 2866.52 square meters respectively, forming part of survey Nos.1 09 to 1 12, situated at Gudimalkapur Village, AsifnagarMandal, Hyderabad [I)istrict ]and making attempts to take over the same, as illegal,high handed, [arbitrary ]and against the principles of natural justice andconsequently to direct the respondents not to interfere with the peacefulpossession and enjoyment of the petitioners over their said property, in theinterest of [justice]

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2010MP. NO: 39074 OF 2010)

Conclusion

Petition under section i s l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High court may be pleased topass an order directing the respondents not to interfere witr the peacefulpossession and enjoyment of the petitioners over their property bearing municipalNos.13-6-463 and 464, admeasuring 929.99 and 2866.52 squire meterrespectively, forming part of survey Nos.109 to i12, situated at dudimalkapurVillage, Asifnagar Mandal, Hyderabad District or to trouble them in ,ny.rnn"i inrespect thereof, pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. V K SHIVA SHANKAR

Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following: ORDER

l-t

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATHWRIT PETITION No.3O7O3 of 2O1OORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is hled questioning the action ofthe respondents in demanding the petitioners to vacatetheir property bearing Municipat Nos. 13-6-463 and464, adrneasuring to an extent of 929.99 and2866.52Sq.Meters respectively, forming part of Survey Nos.109to ll2, situated at Gudimalkapur Village, AsifnagarMandal., Hyderabad and sought for a direction to tlrerespondents not to interfere with their possession andenjoyment of their property

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners andlearned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue forthe respondents and perused the record.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners wouldsubmit that the petitioners are joint owners andpossessors of the property bearing MunicipatNos. 13-6-463 aad 464, admeasuring to an extent i I

of 929.99 and 2g66.52 Sq.Meters respeclively,forming part of Survey Nos.1O9 to ll2, situatr:d atGudimalkapu,r Village, Asifnagar Mandal, Hyderabad(hereinafter r.eferred to as ,subject property) hzrvinginherited tht: sarne from their ancestors. Thepetitioners have also declared the said property aswithin the cerling limit in their statements hled alongwith the Special Offrcer ald Competent Authority,Urban Land C)eiling Hyderabad under Section 6 (1) ofthe Urban Lrmd (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 7q76.Basing on thr: said declaration, an enquiry was alsoconducted and an order was passed on 2g.06.1982 infile No.CC No.Bll IO27I11976 holding that the saidproperty is within ttre ceiling limit and they did nothold any ['1and ]to be declared as excess vacantincluding the subject property and the names of thepetitioners have also been- recorded in the reverluerecords. Furl.her, the said property was the sub.lectmatter of par-titition suit on the vile of IV Additiona_l District Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and theconnected appeal before this Court in CCCANo.4O/ 1982. While it being so, the petitioners havealso received notice from the Town Survey Departmentunder Section 9 (2) of the A.P.Survey and BoundariesAct, 1923, confirming their right, title possession andinterest in the subject property.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners wouldfurther submit that initially the petitioners owned landadmeasuring to an extent of Ac.3.8O4 guntas atGudima,tkapur and out of the said land, they have soldarl extent of 14,000 Sq.Yards in favour of M/s.AshokVihar Cooperative House Building Society throughregistered document No.623/198 1 dated 31.03.1981.In pursuance thereof, the said society had obtainedclearance from the Government for change of land. usefrom recreational to residential under G.O.Ms.No.150-MA dated 24.01.1982 and the said Societv had allotted plots to its Members and most of them havealready been ,:onstructed houses.

5. The lealned Counsel for the petitioners wouldfurther subrnit that the petitioners have alsomortgaged the subject property with the Bank of Indiaand obtained Overdraft. The petitioners are also payingproperty tax c)n the subject property. The respondentsare planning to construct a building in a portion of thesubject propc)rty for Government School without theconsent and knowledge of the petitioners. Thepossession of the petitioners over the subject propertyis for more Lean six decades and if the respondnetsintend to acquire the said property, the petitioners areentitled for compensation. While it being so, theofficials of the respondent No.3 along with others cameto the subjecl. property on 24.1 1.2010 and threatenedthem to lean,e the subject property. Even if the -J

respondents haveany rnterest over ttre rnterest over ttre over ttre ttre propert5r, they have to follow due process of law.

any rnterest over ttre rnterest over ttre over ttre ttre subject

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioners wouldfurther submit that the Government Authorities havenot filed any single document or record showing theland belongs to the Government except the TownSurvey Number 213 is recorded as GVM Road. Nosurvey was done at aty point of time or if at ail surveywas conducted to the survey Nos. 109 to I12, there wasno survey report except handwritten sketch hled alongwith the counter by the respondent No.3 without anyclarilication by the superior aul horities.

7. The learned Counsel for the petitioners wouldfurther submit that while passing interim orders. thisCourt has directed the respondents to filecomprehensive counter affidavit together with a surveymap showing the location of the petitioners, housenumber and the land clajmed by the Government, but so far 1-tLe respondents have not subrnittedcomprehensive report to substantiate their claim

8. The lerrned Counsel for the petitioners wouldfurther subtnit that para No.5 of the counter statesthat the land in Sy.No.2/3 to an extent of 326Sq.Meters out of 1360 Sq.Metrs was handed over toEducation Department for construction of schooibuilding and Anganwadi, but the respondents have notfiled any proof that they have handed over the land toEducation Department and requested to a11ow the writpetition.

9. The bzLrned Counsel for the petitioners placedreliance on [-,he ]following Judgment in support of thecontention of the petitioners.

7. State of Andhra Prad.esh Vs. Hgderabad.Potteries Priaate Lit, And. another tPotteries Priaate Lit, And. another t .:-'

Revenue basing [on ][the ][counter hied ][by the ][respondent]No.3 would submit that [the ][land ][in ][T'S'No'2/3,]Block-K, Ward-20 of [Guddimalkapur ][Village ][is]classified as 'GVM' [(Government ][land ][vested ][with]Municipality) Road [to ][an ][extent ][of ][1360 ][Sq'Meters ][and]the said land is [correlated ][to ][old ][Sy'Nos'lO9/p ][and]110/p of the said village. [Out ][of ][the ][said ][extent, ][afl]extent of 376 Sq.Mters [was allotted ][and ][physical]possession was given to [Dy' IOS ][(Education]on [18.06.200 ][1 ][and ][an ][extent ][of ][540]Department) was [allotted ][to ][Community ][Hall ][and ][440]Sq.Meters is covered [by ][GVM ][Road' ][The ][petitioners]Sq.Meters the [vacant ][piece ][of ][land ][in ][Sy'No'2/3]are claiming which was already [allotted ][to ][the ][school ][building]stating that they are [the ][owners ][of ][the ][tand ][in]to lt2 [of ][Gudimalakpur ][village']Sy.No.1O9

11. The learned [Assistant ][Government ][Pleader ][would]further submit [that ][the Town ][Survey ][was ][conducted]under the [provisions ][of ][A.P.Survey ][and ][Boundaries]

Act, 7923 in Twin Cities during the period 1964_65and a Notification under Section 6(1) of the said Actwas issued inviting all the persons to participate in theenquiry for determining the boundaries and a_ftercompleting the survey, Notification was publishedunder Section 13 of the Act in the Gazette. Neither thepetitioners' vendor nor anybody have ever agitatedregarding the entries in Town Survey records withinthe stipuiat,:d period of three years and theretry theentries made in Town Survey Records have becomefinal. Further the petitioners have not challenged theentries in th.e Town Survey records at any time. Thepetitioners are claiming the land in T.S.No.2/3, whichis Governme:nt land classihed as [,GVM, ](Governmentland vested [.with ]Municipality) Road arrd there are nomerits and rr:quested to dismiss the writ petition.

1.2. After hearing both sides and on perusing therecord, this Court is of the considered view that thepetitioners are questioning the action of the i***.,:t respondents in demanding the petitioners to vacate thesuit schedule property bearing Municipal Nos. [13-6-]463 and 464, admeasuring to an extent of 929.99Sq.Meters and 2866.52 Sq.Meters respectively, formingpart of Sy.Nos. 109 to 112, situated at GudimalkapurVillage, Asifnagar Mandal.

13. The contention of the petitioners .is that the suitschedule land was declared as within the ceiling [lirnit]as per the orders of the Special Oflicer and CompetentAuthority in File No.CC No.B 1/ 10291 176 dated28.06.1982. Basing on the partition decree [the]petitioners have become as owners of the subjectproperty. Now, the respondents, only basing on theTown Survey Records,areinterfering with thepossession of the petitioners over the subject property1n T.S.No.2/3, Block-K, Ward-2O of Gudima-lkapurVillage, classified as GVM' (Government land vestedwith Municipality) to an extent of 1360 Sq.Meters and SK, J

the salne was clubbedGudimalkzrpur Village.

lnSy.Nos. lO9 /P of

74. As p,:r the records, there is no dispute withregard to rselling of the 1and to arr extent of 14,000 Sq.Yards to M/s Ashok Vihar Cooperative HousingBuilding Scciety through registered document by thepetitioners and the Government .. also issuedG.O.Ms.No,1SO-MA, dated 24.01.1082 anrl theMembers o the said Society have already constructedhouses in the said larrd. Now, the dispute is withregard to ,tpen site in which the respondents arewalted to r:onstruct school buitding. The petitionersare claiming that the open site belongs to them arrdwithout foll,twing any procedure, the respondents areinterfering lvith the possession of the petitioners overthe said property.

15. The res;pondents are not disputing with regard tothe earlier proceedings1nCC No.Bll to29t/76the earlier proceedings1nCC No.Bll to29t/76

\t.

dated 28.06.1982 issued by the Special Officer andCompetent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, whereinthe subject land was within the ceiling limit underSection 6 (1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling aldRegulation) Act, 1976 and also not disputing theselling of land to an extent of 14,OOO Sq.Yards to M/sAshok Vihar Cooperative Housing Building Society, butstating that they wanted to occupy the vacant land onthe ground that the said property belongs to theGovernment.

16. The petitioners have obtained orders in theirfavour in ULC Proceedings CC.No.B1/ 10291/76dated 28.06.1982 ald also sold some part of theproperty to M/s Ashok Vihar Cooperative HousingBuilding Society and therea-fter the said societyobtained clearance from the Government for chaage ofland use from recreational to residential videG.O.Ms.No.150-MA, dated 24.O1.1982. Now, only basing on the Town Survey record, the respondents are claiming that the saidproperty belongsto theGovernmen t an cl wantedto construct schoolbuildingtherein.therein.

The .Irrdgment relied on by the learned Counsellearned Counsel

77. The .Irrdgment relied on by the learned Counsellearned Counselfor the petitioners in State of Andhra pro.desh Vs.Hgderabad potteries Ltd.., and. crnother (s_upra)squarely apply to the facts of the instant case, Therelevant porlion of the said Judgment, is as follows.on by the learned Counsellearned Counselfor the petitioners in State of Andhra pro.desh Vs.Hgderabad potteries Ltd.., and. crnother (s_upra)squarely apply to the facts of the instant case, Therelevant porlion of the said Judgment, is as follows.

"26 1-h': sore basis of rhe Appelant ro craim the tantr wat on thestrength ef cntries macle in .;urvey records showing thot lhe .;cheduleproperry t,vas surwyed as T.S No. 4 /2, Itard No. 66 of Bakoramvillage hut,ing an area of l92ll sq. meters showing it as a gap oreai e un-sun'eyed area as per the ord survey records and as such it couldonly be declaretl to be Goternment land as has been recordecl inColumn Nr,. 20 of the T.S.L.R. Apart from the said revenue recrtrcl ondissuance o,{ gozelte noli,/i.cation as mentioned hereinaboye, ntt othermaterial documenr was Jited by the Appeuanr to show thar tirc saidland belon5,ed only to Government. It is trite that entry in the revenuerecord alone may not be sulficient as conclusive proof of tirle nor canbe relied on.for proo.f ofestablishing the title as such,

I B. In the instant case [af ]so the [respondents only]basing on the T.S.L.R claiming that the [land]lnT.S.No.2/3 admeasuring to an extent of 1360 [sq.]meters was classihed as 'GVM' (Government [land]vested with Municipafiry) Road and the respondentshave also not fited any other document to [show ][that]the said land belongs to Government and, [moreover,]the rights of the petitioners were also declared [under]the Urban Land Ceiling proceedings in File [No.CC]No.Bll lo29l176 dated 28.06 .L982 and [recorded ][their]names in the revenue records and thereafter,somepart of the land sold by the petitioners was convertedfrom 'recreation' to 'residential' and the [purchasers]have also constructed houses in their respective [plots.]Now, the respondents claim that the remaining [land ][is]Government land without any basis. In [view ][of ][the]same, the interference of the respondents [in ][the]subject land is arbitrary and illegaI.

19. In view of the above finding, the writ petition isdisposed o1' directing the respondents not to interferewith the ltossession and enjoyment of the petitionersover the subject property bearing MunicipalNos. 13-6-,1ti3 and 464, admeasuring to an extent of929.99 ancl, 2866.52 Sq.Meters respectively, formingpart of Sy.Nos.109 to 112, situated at GudimalkapurVillage, Asifnagar Manda_l, Hyderabad, w.ithoutfollowing chre process of law. If the respondents wantto acquire the subject land they have to follow theprocedure under Right to Fair Compensation andTransparen,:y in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitatic,n andResettlemerLt Act, 20 13.

20. Miscetlaneous Petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs, SD/- L.VIJAYA LAXMIASSGISTRAROFFICER

//TRUE COPYII

To,

12345 g1ruff til iwstttr?lafirm#u**l:;'6Two CD CopiesKKSPSK

HIGH COURT

DATED:31 112t2024

ORDER

WP.No.30703 of 2010

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTONWITHOUT COSTS

/1z

J?/.,/tS

z:1 ?[lHE ][S][ i4r](\,l I lAtt ?.u\x* { 1..P4rc$rs_