Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 3797
HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy, J
M/s Suvama Agro Farms. Pvt Ltd – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.6705 of 2025
Long-term payment of property taxes on agricultural constructions without state intervention creates a presumption of authorization, protecting such structures from summary demolition, provided the owner seeks regularization under Section 61 of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli.
Headnote:The case involves an analysis of Section 61 of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, regarding the right of agricultural land occupants to construct godowns or dwelling units. A company claimed ownership and possession of agricultural land where it had constructed a godown and watchman rooms for monitoring a mango garden, asserting that property taxes had been paid for 21 years. The court found that while the statute allows such constructions subject to written permission from the District Collector, the lack of prior action by authorities despite long-term tax payments creates a presumption of authorization. The primary issue was whether the authorities could demolish the existing structures without following due process, given the legal provision under Section 61 of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli. The court reasoned that since the construction has been assessed for property tax since 1999 and the respondents failed to initiate action for over two decades, the structures should not be demolished immediately. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim of ownership and possession of agricultural land with existing structures and tax payments. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. statutory requirement for written permission for agricultural constructions under land revenue act. (Para 4) |
| 3. presumption of authorization based on long-term tax payment and administrative inaction. (Para 5) |
| 4. disposition of writ petition with directions for regularization. (Para 6 , 7) |
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondents No.3 and 4 in interfering with the temporary shed/house bearing No.7-11 (Old No.1-11) built in the agricultural land admeasuring Acs.8.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/37, Acs.4.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/40, Acs.5.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/42, Acs.4.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/49, Acs.5.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/27, Acs.06.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/34 and Acs.6.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/38 total admeasuring Acs.38.00 guntas, situated at Sayyedguda Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and trying to demolish the temporary shed/house without following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently prayed for other appropriate reliefs.
2. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.
3. The petitioner-company claims to be the owner and possessor of the land to an extent of Acs.8.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/37, Acs.4.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/40, Acs.5.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/42, Ac.4.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/49, Acs.5.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/27, Acs.06.00 guntas in Sy.No.24/34 and Acs.6.00 gts in Sy.No.24/38 total admeasuring Acs.38.00 guntas situated at Sayyedguda Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is stated that the petitioner-company’s name is recorded in the revenue records as pattadar and possessor and the revenue authorities also issued the pattadar passbook and title deed. It is further stated that the petitioner raised the mango garden in its agricultural land and for the purpose of monitoring the garden, a godown and watchman rooms have been constructed. The petitioner is also paying property tax and other taxes payable to the local authorities. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are treating the said construction as illegal construction and are making efforts to demolish the said construction without issuing any notice. Hence, this writ petition.
4. Learned Government Pleader has not disputed that as per Section 61 of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, the farmers/occupants of the agricultural lands are entitled to construct or repair godowns or wells on the land occupied by him or otherwise to improve the condition. Even though they are entitled to construct godowns/tin roof shed/dwelling units in the agricultural lands, they are required to obtain written permission from the District Collector for the purpose of agricultural activities. It is not the case of the petitioner that an application has been submitted to the Talukdar to grant appropriate permission or consider the same within the time specified under the said Act. Except stating that the petitioner has paid the property tax and other taxes for the said construction, the petitioner has not stated anything with regard to obtaining permission.
5. In view of the same, as the statute permits the petitioner to construct godowns or dwelling units or repair the existing godowns and as it is stated that the said construction is already assessed for the property tax and it is regularly paying the property tax from 1999, i.e., almost for 21 years, this Court is drawing the presumption that the said construction is an authorized construction as the respondents failed to initiate any action. Therefore, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any further course of action for removal or demolition of the existing construction/structure. At the same time, ends of justice would be met, if the petitioner is directed to make an application seeking regularization of such construction in
