COMMON ORDER:

Heard Mr.M.Pranav, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Somu Srinivas Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

2. The lis involved in all the aforesaid Writ Petitions is common. Therefore, the same were heard together and decided by way of this common order.

3. In all the aforesaid Writ Petitions, respondent No.4-Tahsildar has issued notice vide Rc.No.B/590/2024, dated 15.03.2024, stating that the petitioners original assignees i.e., Mr.Bhukya Basha in W.P.No.9925 of 2024 died and his legal heirs are doing mining activities in the land admeasuring Ac.3-12 gts in Sy.No.137/4, Mr.Boda Saojini in W.P.No.9459 of 2024 died and her legal heirs are doing mining activities in the land admeasuring Ac.2-00 gts in Sy.No.138/23, Mr.Ajmmeta Ambri in W.P.No.9932 of 2024 died and his legal heirs are doing mining activities in the land admeasuring Ac.1-20 gts in Sy.No.138/41/1, Mr.Dharamsoth Valya in W.P.No.9954 died and his legal heirs are doing mining activities in the land admeasuring Ac.1-11 gts in Sy.No.138/1/7 and Mr.Lakavath in W.P.No.9987 of 2024 died and his legal heirs are doing mining activities in the land admeasuring Ac.1-20 gts in Sy.No.137/1. The aforesaid properties are situated at Ballepalli Village, Khammam District, Telangana. Therefore, respondent No.4 directed the said assignees to submit explanation as to why the said assignment should not be resumed to the Government for the said violation and has granted 15 days time to submit explanation. In W.P.No.9987 of 2024, respondent No.4 has issued another notice dated 06.04.2024 to the petitioner. Petitioners in all the Writ Petitions have submitted explanations all dated 10.04.2024. According to the petitioners, the assignees are alive and the information mentioned by respondent No.4 i.e., assignees died is factually incorrect. They are before this Court and they have filed all the documents including copies of latest Pattadar Passbooks etc. According to them, they are not doing any illegal mining activities. Even then, respondent No.4 is trying to dispossess the petitioners from the aforesaid properties without following due procedure laid down under law.

Therefore, the present Writ Petitions.

4. As discussed supra, in all the aforesaid notices, respondent No.4 has stated that the assignees died and their legal heirs are doing mining activities illegally in the said properties. The same is factually incorrect. All the assignees are alive. They are before this Court. They have filed all the documents including latest Pattadar Passbooks etc. Therefore, the impugned notices dated 15.03.2024 are liable to be set aside.

5. At this stage, Mr.M.Pranav, learned counsel for the petitioners apprehends that respondent No.4 may dispossess the petitioner without following due procedure laid down under law, during summer vacation.

6. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, these Writ Petitions are disposed of, directing respondent No.4 to issue fresh notices to the petitioners herein, if so advised, granting them 15 days time to submit explanation, pass orders strictly in accordance with law by putting the petitioners on notice and affording them an opportunity. He shall complete the said exercise within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till the said exercise is completed, respondent No.4 is directed not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject properties. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these Writ Petitions shall stand closed.

__________________

K. LAKSHMAN, J

19.04.2024 vsl

187 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION Nos.9925, 9459, 9932, 9954 and 9987 of 2024

19.04.2024 vsl