THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.40900 of 2014

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of 1^st respondent in initiating LTR proceedings in LTR Case No.8-CHRL-2014 against the petitioner herein in respect of patta land of the petitioner in Survey No.48, 49/3, and 49/2 to an extent of Ac.7-15 cents, Ac.9-85 cents and Ac.6-70 cents totaling to Ac.23-70 cents of gommu Puliboinapalli village, Charla mandal, Khammam District, as illegal and void and opposed to Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to refrain from in any way proceeding with LTR proceedings initiated by 1st respondent in respect of land in question.

2. Heard Sri P.V. Mahesh, learned counsel for the petitioner; and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare.

3. Brief facts of the case as per writ affidavit are that the pursuant to the notice issued I Form-E in Rc.No.A/1037/2014 dated 05.10.2014, the petitioner filed detailed explanation dated 22.10.2014 before 1st respondent. Without considering the same, and without there being transfer in contravention of Section 3 of Regulation 1/59, initiated LTR proceedings in LTR Case No.8-CHRL-2014, dated 18.11.2014. Further having initiated the proceedings under Section 3 of the Telangana Scheduled Areas (Land Transfer) Regulation 1 of 1959, the petitioner was required to appear before 1^st respondent on 28.11.2014 and later adjourned to 19.12.2014 and same was further adjourned to 06.01.2015. In the said Form-E notice dated 05.10.2014, it is stated that the petitioner is believed to have been in possession of schedule property claiming under transfer and on that basis, the petitioner was required to Show Cause within 15 days why the petitioner should not be ejected and the land taken over by Government. It is the case of the petitioner that the land in question was under the occupation during the existence of Mahals and after abolition of Mahals, the Ryotwari Settlement Regulation has come into force and the petitioners were continuing in occupation of land, and in exercise of such power conferred upon Settlement Officer, the claims of possessors, like the petitioner, were taken into account and the Settlement Officer granted patta in favour of all legal heirs of late Satyanarayana who happened to be petitioner’s father, and patta was granted in the name of the elder brother Mummaneni Rama Krishna Choudary and 14 others including petitioner. All the brothers are staying outside the area and the petitioner has been looking after the interests of all the legal heirs as the petitioner was residing locally in the area of the land. A patta was granted in Case No.1819 dated 15.04.1974. While so, respondent No.4 has made every attempt thereby making claim for Ac.6- 70 cents in Survey No.49/2 on the ground that his forefathers have cleared the jungle and brought the land under cultivation, and that this is a false claim; and on the other hand it was also claimed by respondent No.4 that patta was erroneously granted and he also filed an appeal before the Settlement Director and the same is pending, however, nothing has been filed to show that there is an appeal pending before Settlement Officer. In the circumstances, it has become necessary to seek police protection from the interference of respondent No.4. For that purpose, the petitioner filed O.S.No.158/2017 on the file of Special Assistant Agent and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mobile Court, at Bhadrachalam, in which respondent No.4 herein has been the sole defendant. Ultimately, the suit was decreed on 13.02.2013 and it has become final. While so, respondent No.4 filed another suit for perpetual injunction against the petitioner in respect of Ac.6-70 cents in Survey No.49/2 of G.P. Palli village and this was filed before the Agent to Government at Khammam, and the suit was originally numbered as O.S.No.148/2007; and this was directed to be transferred to Mobile Court, Bhadr