THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.2780 of 2012

ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order dated 13.01.2011 passed by the respondent No.3 in Proc.No.B/31166/2010 as confirmed by the respondent Nos.2 and 1 vide orders in Proc.No.449/2011 dated 20.08.2011 and E7/5807/2011 dated 28.12.2011 respectively, as arbitrary and illegal.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and perused the record.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the father of petitioner No.1 has purchased land admeasuring to an extent of 2735 Square Yards, situated outside Lal-Darwaja, Boiguda Mohalla (Kandikal Gate), Hyderabad from one Ghousia Begum @ Choti Begum, wife of late Abdul Razak through registered sale deed bearing No.1325/1958 dated 22.12.1958. The said Ghousia Begum had purchased the said property from Mohd.Moinuddin Ahmed S/o. Mohd.Hidayat Ali under a registered sale deed No.214/1954 dated 21.05.1954.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the father of the petitioner No.1 had two brothers viz., Jagannadham @ Jangaiah and Laxmaiah. Petitioner No.2 is the son of Jagannadham and petitioner No.3 is the son of Laxmaiah. After the death of their fathers, the petitioners being the successors-in-interest of their respective fathers are in possession and enjoyment of the said property. The ancestral house of the petitioners is situated at a distance of furlong from the subject land of 300 sq. yards, which is surrounded by a compound wall on four sides. During his life time, the father of the petitioner No.1 has filed a declaration in respect of the subject land of 300 Sq.Yards under Urban Land Ceiling Act along with the properties owned by him.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that while it being so, the respondent No.3-Tahsildar has issued a notice bearing No.C/2648/2010 dated 30.12.2010 under Section 7 of Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1905 (for short ‘Land Encroachment Act’) to the petitioners alleging that the subject land is Government land. In reply to the said notice, the petitioners have requested to furnish the necessary documents. Instead of furnishing the documents as sought by the petitioners, the respondent No.3 issued another notice No.B/31166/ 2010 on 31.01.2011 under Section 6 of the Land Encroachment Act to vacate the premises within two days. In response thereto, the petitioners have field a reply on 25.11.2011, wherein they asserted their title to the said land and requested the respondent No.3 to drop further proceedings contending that the entries in the Town Survey Land Records ( for short ‘TSLR)’ based on which notices were issued, cannot form the basis for initiating action under the Land Encroachment Act and also requested to give an opportunity of personal hearing and for title documents of the Government, but no such document was furnished to the petitioners.

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that challenging the notices dated 30.12.2010 and 31.01.2011 issued by the respondent No.3, the petitioners preferred a statutory appeal in File No.B/449/2011 before the respondent No.2-Revenue Divisional Officer and the said appeal was dismissed on 20.08.2011. During the time of hearing, the petitioners have submitted extract of TSLR and copy of village Map of Kandikal, but the respondent No.2 has not considered the said documents. The village map clearly shows that the entire lands of Kandikal village including the subject land are ‘Abadi’, thus the order of the respondent No.2 is contrary to the record and is perverse.

7. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that against the order of dismissal dated 20.08.2011, the petitioners filed Revision in Proc.No.E7/5807/2011 before the respondent No.1 and the said revision was also dismissed on 28.12.2011. The petitioners have been in