SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Telangana) 383

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, J.
Kudikata Rajaveeru - Appellant
Versus
Vikas Raj, Ias And Others - Respondent
Contempt Case No. 1534 of 2019
Decided On : 06-03-2020

Advocates:
P. Rajasekhar, Advocate

Headnote:

Writ Petition - He contended that the respondents were insisting that he should voluntarily consent for widening of the road and that he apprehended demolition of his house in the road widening process - Respondents in the Contempt Case, in collusion with Ex.Sarpach of the said village, have proposed to widen the existing mud road from 13 to 18 by laying C.C. road as well as mission Bhagirathi pipe lines in the village colonies including the area adjacent to western side of the petitioners house and appurtenant land - Held, In Courts considered opinion, 4th respondent is not speaking the truth because of not only the above reasons but also because the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat spoke of widening of the existing roads and not merely converting the existing road into C.C. road - If really C.C. road was not laid in the property belonging to the petitioner and C.C. road was only laid on the existing road, there would have been no requirement of any land of the petitioner or for demolition of his compound wall - Case allowed.

JUDGMENT

M.S.Ramachandra Rao, J. - This Contempt Case is filed by the petitioner alleging willful disobedience of the order dt.08-08-2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in W.P.No.28176 of 2018.

2. Petitioner had filed the said Writ Petition stating that he was the absolute owner and possessor of house bearing H.No.3-30 along with appurtenant land an extent of 169 sq. yds situated at Chelpur Village, Huzurabad Mandal, Karimnagar District having inherited it from his father, and he claimed to be in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said land by paying house tax and electricity charges. Copies of which were filed as Exs.P-1 to P-3 in the Writ Petition.

3. He alleged in the Writ Petition that the respondents in the Contempt Case, in collusion with Ex.Sarpach of the said village, have proposed to widen the existing mud road from 13' to 18' by laying C.C. road as well as mission Bhageeratha pipe lines in the village colonies including the area adjacent to western side of the petitioner's house and appurtenant land; instead of taking the land equally on both sides of existing road, without following due process of law, they interfered with the possession of the petitioner and tried to demolish the petitioner's house for laying the C.C. road and the pipe lines. He contended that the Ex.Sarpanch of Chelpur Gram Panchayat demolished part of petitioner's compound wall along with existing lavatory and toilet without following the due procedure. He filed Ex.P-4 photograph also along with the Writ Petition.

4. He contended that the respondents were insisting that he should voluntarily consent for widening of the road and that he apprehended demolition of his house in the road widening process.

5. In the Writ Petition, he sought an interim direction in IA.No.1 of 2018 not to interfere with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property in an extent of 169 sq. yds.

6. On 08-08-2018, when the Writ Petition was listed along with I.A.No.1 of 2018, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj took notice for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 5 in the Writ Petition, learned Government Pleader for Revenue took notice for 2nd respondent and Sri G.Narender Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for 4th respondent in the Writ Petition. Notice was directed to be served on the 6th respondent, the Ex.Sarpanch of the village. This Court, on that day, granted direction to the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of petitioner's property as well as appurtenant land pending disposal of the Writ Petition in IA.No.1 of 2018.

7. Alleging that the said order was violated, though the said order was communicated by the petitioner on 12-08-2019 to the respondents in the Contempt Case and that they laid C.C. road as well as Mission Bhageeratha pipeline apart from erecting electricity pole on the western side of the petitioner's house/land, this Contempt Case was filed.

8. In the counter filed by 1st respondent it is contended that there was a decision in Gram Sabha held on 14-04-2018 to widen the internal roads and to lay C.C. roads and drains and that the compound wall/boundary as per marking should be removed by the residents of the Village voluntarily within 15 days; that a notice was also issued to the petitioner by the Panchayat Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, Chelpur on 20-04-2018; that petitioner did not remove his compound wall and also did not file any objections regarding its removal; that petitioner gave a declaration on 05-05-2018 to the Panchayat Secretary that he would remove his wall within 7 days voluntarily; and thereafter the Gram Panchayat removed the wall on 20-06-2018 much before the interim order passed by the Court on 08-08-2018.

9. It is contended that the drains and CC roads were laid by the Executive Engineer (PR), Huzurabad and they are in existence now at the spot.

10. It is contended that the C.C. road work was done in June, 2018 itself recording the date as 23-06-2018 in M.Book. It is contended that after rec

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top