THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.6365 of 2022

ORDER:

Heard Sri T.V.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. Perused the material on record.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition seeking to declare the action of the respondent No.3 in issuing impugned order bearing R.C.No.B/365/2021 dated 17.01.2022 under Section 6 of the Telangana Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for brevity, “the Act, 1905”) without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 31.12.2021, as illegal and arbitrary.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the then Settlement officer conducted suo-moto enquiry under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Ryotwari Settlement Regulation, 1970 (now called “the Telangana Scheduled Areas Ryotwari Settlement Regulation, 1970” and hereinafter referred to as “the Regulation II of 1970”) for grant of ryotwari patta in respect of the land admeasuring 0.08 Hectares, 0.17 Hectares and 1.05 Hectares in Sy.Nos.44/1 (Part), 44/1 (Part) and 62/1 (Part) respectively, situated at Dosillapalli (G) Village, erstwhile Nugur Taluk, Bhadradri- Kothagudem District and vide order dated 30.06.1983, the Settlement Officer allowed the said case in respect of land in Sy.No.44/1 (Part) admeasuring Ha.0.84 and rejected the case in respect of the land in Sy.Nos.44/1 and 62/1 admeasuring Ha.0.17 and Ha.1.05. Aggrieved by the said order dated 30.06.1983 in Case No.4973 of 1983, the petitioner filed an appeal before the then Director of Settlement and Commissioner of Appeal and the said appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Settlement Officer for reconsideration. However, the then Settlement Officer vide order dated 17.08.2007 in Case No.4973/1985 disallowed the claim. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner filed an appeal before respondent No.2 and the same was numbered as A2/1206/2008 dated 11.02.2008, which is pending for consideration till date.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that while it being so, the respondents issued impugned notice dated

27.12.2021vide R.C.No.B/365/2021 under Section 7 of the Act, 1905, alleging that the subject land is a Government Land and directing the petitioner to handover the possession of the land. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted her reply to the said notice on 31.12.2021 and without considering the same, the respondent No.3 passed impugned order dated 17.01.2022 vide R.C.No.B/365/2021 under Section 6 of the Act, 1905.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the instructions issued by the Government in Memorandum No.892/J2/80-3 dated 17.07.1980, wherein it is stated that under the Estates (Abolition and conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948, as well as Regulations 1/69, 2/69 and 2/70, the Tahsildars are directed not to evict the claimants from the lands whose cases are pending settlement of claims before the Director of Settlement for grant of ryotwari pattas. In the instant case also, the appeal filed by the petitioner is still pending before the Director of Settlements under the Regulation II of 1970, and therefore, learned counsel requested this Court to allow the present Writ Petition by setting aside the impugned order dated 17.01.2022.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, basing on the written instructions issued by respondent No.3-Tahsildar, submits that in view of the application made by one Sri Manyam Ramalinaeswara Rao, for settling the dispute between him and the petitioner, the respondent No.3 has conducted enquiry and moreover the Collector and District Magistrate, Bhadadri-Kothagudem District has issued instructions in the Revenue Officers Conference dated 07.10.2021, directing that the Government Land is necessary for Governm