THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking following relief:

“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in illegally laying road in Sy.No. 312 instead of Sy.No. 311 without acquiring the land of the Petitioners i.e. property in Sy.No. 312 situated at Dundigal Village, Medchal Malkajgiri District, belonging to the Petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and untenable and consequently directing the respondent no.2 and 3 to remove the road from Sy.No. 312 situated at Dundigal Village, Medchal Malkajgiri District and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. It is stated that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Acs. 2.16 guntas in Survey No.312, situated at Dundigal Village, Medchal-Malkajgiri District (for short, ‘the subject land’) and her name was mutated in the revenue records and pattadar passbook and title deed were issued to the petitioner vide Passbook No.T06040030256 as per the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2020 (for short, ‘the ROR Act, 2020’). The grievance of the petitioner is that the Government has laid road in the land of the petitioner in Survey No.312 deviating from the original alignment of road in Survey No.311. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently contended that the respondents instead of laying road in Survey No.311 are forcibly occupying the land of the petitioner in Survey No.312 and are making efforts to lay the road/expansion of the existing road. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the report of the 3rd respondent- Tahsildar vide Lr.No.B/290/2022 dated 31.03.2022 wherein it is stated that the matter has been enquired by the Mandal Girdawar and Mandal Surveyor, Gandimaisamma-Dundigal Tahsil, who reported that they inspected the lands in Survey Nos.311 and 312 and on physical verification it was found that the road was laid in Survey No.312 and in fact, as per Village Naksha, the road falls in Survey No.311 and submitted a report enclosing sketch and Google map. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the pattadar of land and the revenue authorities also issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in respect of the subject land vide Passbook No.T06040030256 as per the provisions of the ROR Act, 2020 and the respondents without issuing any notice or proceedings are making efforts to the change the alignment of the road/expansion of the road by encroaching the lands of the petitioner forming part of Survey No.312.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents disputing the above submissions has stated that the respondents have only undertaken the work of extension of the existing road forming part of Survey Nos.311 and 312 and the said road is having ingress and egress to the neighbouring owners since long time. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further contended that the respondents have only undertaken the work of expansion of existing road and they are not encroaching the petitioner’s patta land in any manner.

6. From the above submissions, it is seen that there is a serious dispute relating to the existing road i.e, whether the same is forming part of Survey Nos.311 and 312 as claimed by the respondents or the same is laid in Sy.No.312 of patta lands of the petitioner or they are proceeding for expansion of the existing road in the right of way vested in the State. In the opinion of this Court, these issues are required to be adjudicated by considering the documents and evidence in appropriate proceedings. Since it is stated by the