WP/492/2006 of Chinna Ammai W/o Balraju, Vs The District Collector Ranga Reddy District, on 30 December 2008

COMMON ORDER:

These two writ petitions are filed by certain individuals, whoclaim to have been granted house site pattas in Survey No.58 ofFatullaguda Village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, to declarethe alleged unlawful interference of the respondents with theirpossession and enjoyment of the respective plots, as illegal andarbitrary.

These cases have a long history. Multiple rounds of litigationhave been launched prior to the filing of these two writ petitions. Forthe purpose of disposal of these two writ petitions, it is not necessary torefer to all those writ petitions except two writ petitions namelyW.P.No.14377 of 2001 and W.P.No.9998 of 2003. In the firstmentioned writ petition, the Urban Huts and Slums DwellerDevelopment Association (Registered) Twin Cities, represented by itsGeneral Secretary – Syed Ismail, the petitioner therein sought for a writof mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in handingover the physical possession of the plots to the members of thepetitioner-association in Survey No.58 of Fatullaguda Village, UppalMandal, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal and arbitrary. The learnedGovernment Pleader for Assignments, on the basis of the instructions,reported to the Court that enquiry into the verification of the listsubmitted by the said association with reference to the listing ofbeneficiaries of house plots was undertaken and that it was found thatthe members of the petitioner-association were found to be entitled forgrant of assignments. Having taken note of the said representation,this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the respondents tocomplete the process of grant of assignment and issue pattas to all those beneficiaries, who are found to be eligible for such assignmentand put them in possession.

W.P.No.9998 of 2003 was filed by the same association for a writof mandamus to direct the respondents to forbear from evicting themembers of the society numbering 417 from the plots covered by theirhouse site pattas. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Courton 23.12.2003. In the said order, the learned Judge referred to orderdated 03.09.2001 passed in W.P.No.14377 of 2001 and the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents in C.C.No.970 of 2002, which wasfiled alleging disobedience of the order passed in the said writ petition,wherein it was stated that out of 417 beneficiaries, 101 beneficiarieswere put in possession of the land and that the respondents are readyand willing to give possession if the members of the petitionerassociation come forward to take delivery of the land. The learnedJudge also referred to W.P.No.4235 of 2002 filed by two othersocieties namely Navachaitanya Mahila Society and Prathibha MahilaMandali in which Urban Huts and Slum Dwellers DevelopmentAssociation was impleaded as respondent No.5, wherein the followingorder was passed:

“i) if the respondents and the Government intendto grant house site pattas in Sy.No.58 ofFathullaguda, the Joint Collector, RangaReddy District may issue notice to all thepersons fond in the list enclosed to the writpetition (W.P.No.4235 of 2002) and enquireinto their claims;to grant house site pattas in Sy.No.58 ofFathullaguda, the Joint Collector, RangaReddy District may issue notice to all thepersons fond in the list enclosed to the writpetition (W.P.No.4235 of 2002) and enquireinto their claims;

ii)if the pattas granted to any of the membersof the petitioner associations after enquiry arefound to be genuine, they shall also beconsidered for grant of house site pattas;

iii)insofar as the pattas granted to themembers of the fifth respondent associationis concerned, as directed by this Court inW.P.No.13477 of 2001, dated 03.09.2001,they shall be handed over possession aftercompleting the enquiry as directed in clauses(i) and (ii) hereinabove. It shall be open to the fifth respondent to appear before the JointCollector and take all pleas in opposition tothe pattas granted in favour of the membersof the petitioner associations;

iv)the Joint Collector shall complete theexercise as directed herein above within aperiod of three months from today; and

v)there shall be no order as to costs.”

Having taken note of the orders passed in W.P.No.14377 of2001 and W.P.No.4235 of 2002, the learned Judge disposed ofW.P.No.9998 of 2008 with the following directions:

“Admittedly, it was recorded in the order dated28.01.2003 in W.P.No.898 of 2003 that all themembers of the petitioner-association are not inpossession, and in view of the same, this Courtdirected to handover the possession to the membersof the petitioner-association, after completing theenquiry. In view of the same, after leaving (101)members, who were delivered possession, theremaining members, out of (417), if appears beforethe MRO along with patta certificates within a periodof four weeks from today, the MRO shall make anenquiry into the same, after verifying the pattacertificates. Further, the MRO is under obligation toimplement the orders passed by this Court inW.P.No.14377 of 2001, as directed in W.P.No.4235of 2002, after due intimation to the members of thepetitioner-association.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

No order as to costs.”

In the present writ petitions, the petitioners, who are 69 and 82in number respectively claim that they are part of 417 members of theabove mentioned society, who were granted house site pattas and thatdespite the earlier orders passed by this Court, the respondents havebeen seeking to interfere with their peaceful possession of the plots intheir respective occupation.

Separate but identical counter-affidavits have been filed by theMandal Revenue Officer, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,wherein after tracing the long background of the litigation it is admitted that house site pattas were granted to the eligible persons. In thecounter-affidavit filed in W.P.No.330 of 2006, it is averred in para 12 asunder:

“In reply to para 10, it is respectfullysubmitted that in view of the orders of thisHon’ble High Court in W.P.No.4235 of 2002dated 25.03.2003 wherein the Hon’ble HighCourt have ordered for fresh enquiry into thegenuinity of the patta holders for which thepetitioners have not attended.

As per the directions of the Hon’bleHigh Court in W.P.No.4235 of 2002 dated25.03.2003, the enquiry with regard to thegenuineness of the pattas granted to themembers is going on. Out of 417 members110 members have attended for enquiry. Outof 110 members 5 members have notproduced their original pattas and found to bebogus. As such 105 members are foundeligible for consideration of allotment of housesites. The association has not furnished anyparticulars of the remaining members to whompatta certificates were issued and theyapproached the Mandal Revenue Officer forenquiry.

Out of 69 members who have filed thiswrit petition, 13 members only are eligible asper the enquiry conducted by this office. Assuch the remaining 56 members who have notattended the enquiry, hence not eligible forallotment of houses under “Rajiv Gruha Kalpa”or any of the schemes.”

Similarly, in the counter-affidavit filed in W.P.No.492 of 2006 it isstated as follows:

“As per the directions of the Hon’bleHigh Court in W.P.No.4235 of 2002 dated25.03.2003, the enquiry with regard to thegenuineness of the pattas granted to themembers is going on. Out of 417 members110 members have attended for enquiry. Outof 110 members 5 members have notproduced their original pattas and found to bebogus. As such 105 members are found eligible for consideration of allotment of housesites. The Association has not furnished anyparticulars of the remaining members to whompatta certificates were issued and they haveapproached the Mandal Revenue Officer forenquiry.

Out of 82 members who have filed thiswrit petition, 5 members only are eligible as perthe enquiry conducted by this office. As suchthe remaining 77 members who have notattended the enquiry, hence not eligible forallotment of houses under “Rajiv Gruha Kalpa”or any of the schemes.”

It is however stated further in the counter-affidavits that 13 and 5 persons, who are petitioners in these two writ petitionsrespectively were informed that they will be considered for allotment ofhouses in Rajiv Gruha Kalpa Scheme in view of the policy decisiontaken by the Government banning assignment of individual housesites in Hyderabad and Ranga Reddy Districts and to provide shelterto the houseless people in G+3 multistoried flats in the vicinity ofHyderabad and Ranga Reddy District.

At the hearing, Sri S.Tulasidas, learned counsel for thepetitioners fairly conceded to the stand taken by the respondents that13 persons in W.P.No.330 of 2006 and 5 persons in W.P.No.492 of2006 are holding genuine house site pattas. Therefore, the relief, ifany, to be granted in these writ petitions shall be confined only to these18 persons.

Though the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue(Assignment) submitted with reference to the stand taken in thecounter-affidavits that in view of the latest policy of the Governmentimposing ban on the assignment of individual house plots, even these18 persons are not entitled to be given house plots, I have not feltimpressed by this contention.

Admittedly, the orders passed in W.P.Nos.14377 of 2001, 4235of 2002 and 9998 of 2003 have become final. As referred to earlier,directions, which are unequivocal in nature, were granted to therespondents to identify the genuine assignees and put them inpossession. Therefore, on the purported ground of changed policy, theorders passed in the earlier writ petitions to which the respondents areparties cannot be given a goby. As categorically directed inW.P.No.9998 of 2003, the respondents are bound to implement theearlier orders passed by this Court in the above mentioned writpetitions. Therefore, I find no hesitation to hold that the 18 persons,who are identified as holding genuine house site pattas, are entitled tobe in possession of the plots for which they were granted assignments.In view of the stand taken by the respondents that all the occupants ofthe plots were evicted, the respondents are directed to put the 18persons along with the petitioners in these two writ petitions, who areidentified as having genuine assignment pattas, in possession of theirrespective plots covered by the assignment pattas and they shall notinterfere with their possession in future irrespective of the change ofpolicies of the Government. The possession shall be delivered to thesaid persons within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of acopy of this order.

With the above observations and directions, these two writpetitions are disposed of.

As a sequel to disposal of main petitions, interim orders, dated28.07.2006 are vacated and W.P.M.P.No.10431 of 2006 inW.P.No.330 of 2006 and W.P.M.P.No.10433 of 2006 in W.P.No.492 of2006 are dismissed.

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J