2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 37687
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. SARATH, J
Sajjala Ravinder Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana and 5 others – Respondent
WP/5199/2023
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.5199 of 2023
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent Nos.4 to 6 in identifying and making construction of building for Gram Panchayat Office in the open space earmarked for Park in Venkatadri Hills falling under Layout TLP No.15/2020/DTCPO/NLG dated 20.10.2020 in Sy.No.17/P situated at Venkatadripalem Village and Gram Panchayat, Miryalaguda Revenue Mandal, Nalgonda District as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development and Sri P. Kishore Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.6-Gram Panchayat.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolute owner and possessor of plot No.9 admeasuring 397.15 sq. yards in Sy.No.17/P Venkatadripalem Gram Panchayat, Miryalaguda Mandal, Nalgonda District through agreement of sale-GPA dated 16.02.2022. The vendors of petitioner have developed the land, made it into house plots and as per the approved layout, Ac.0.23 cents on plotted area was mortgaged with the Gram Panchayat and Ac.0.25 cents is reserved for park. He submits that the respondent Nos.3 to 6 are proposing to make construction of building for Gram Panchayat Office in the open space earmarked for park in Avanthi Hills Layout and the Divisional Panchayat Officer and District Panchayat Officer have approved the proposal for construction of building for Venkatadripalem Gram Panchayat in the open space. Learned Counsel further submits that though the open space is surrendered to the Gram Panchayat, as per the approved layout dated 20.10.2020, said open space i.e, Ac.0.25 cents, is reserved for park for the residents and it cannot be permitted to convert for any other purpose other than park. He submits that if the respondent No.6 is allowed to proceed with the construction, the petitioners would suffer irreparable loss and injury and requested to direct the respondents not to make any constructions in the open space area earmarked for park.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied on the following decisions;
1. Dr. Danda Narasimhulu vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
2. Kumpatla Appa Rao vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh
3. Telecom Colony Residents Welfare Association vs.
State of Andhra Pradesh
4. Bangalore Medical Trust vs. B.S.Muddappa
5. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.6 based on the counter averments, submits that the respondent No.6-Gram Panchayat is newly formed after bifurcation of separate State in the year 2019 and it is not having own building. The original owners of land in Sy.No.17/P while making layout plots have donated 10.4% open space i.e, 1210 sq. yards through registered Gift Deed dated 24.01.2022 in favour of Venkatadripalem Gram Panchayat and the land to an extent of 500 sq. yards is required for construction of Gram Panchayat Building. He further submits that the Gram Panchayat having obtained
the opinion of the villagers as well as the plot owners in the layout and after conducting general body meeting on 30.01.2023 unanimously resolved to construct the Gram Panchayat Building in the open space which was donated to the Gram Panchayat by the original landlords and requested to dismiss the writ petition.
6. After considering the submissions and perusal of the record, this Court is of the considered view that the respondent authorities have granted layout permission for Venkatadri Hills by obtaining registered gift deed dated 24.01.2022 to an extent of 1210 sq. yards from the developers. After conducting general body meeting with the villagers as well as the plot owners on 30.01.2023, the respondents have proposed to construct the building for the Gram Panchayat in the said land as the village has no Gram Panchayat Office.
7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court and the various High Courts have time and again held th