THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.24064 of 2025

ORDER :

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article

226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the Memo Rc.No.D4A0434/509/2022 dated 29.08.2022, issued by Respondent No.2, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of constitutional rights. The memo rejected the petitioner’s request for allotment of alternate land measuring Ac.03-00 Gts., in Sy.No.99 of Kannala Village, Bellampally Mandal, Mancherial District, Telangana. The petitioner contends that the rejection contradicts the report Rc.No.B/7206/2010 dated 26.03.2011 by respondent No.4, breaches principles of natural justice and infringes Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution. A consequential direction is sought to set aside the impugned memo and to allot the requested land.

2. Heard Mrs.Zainab Khan, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner Sri S.Nagesh Reddy and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of learned Government Pleader for Revenue Sri K.Muralidhar Reddy.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner invokes Article 226 of the Constitution challenging Memo Rc.No.D4A0434/509/2022 dated 29.08.2022 issued by respondent No.2, which rejected his request for allotment of alternate land admeasuring Ac.03-00 Gts., in Sy.No.99 of Kannala Village, Bellampally Mandal, Mancherial District, Telangana. The rejection is alleged to be arbitrary, illegal and contrary to constitutional rights under Articles 14, 21 and 300-A, as well as in violation of natural justice and the official report dated 26.03.2011 in Rc.No.B/7206/2010 issued by respondent No.4. The petitioner's mother, Smt.Naseem, was granted assigned land to an extent of Ac.03-50 cents in Sy.No.62PP under final patta dated 31.07.1989. However, due to an error in land availability, officials later admitted the assignment was unfeasible and recommended alternate allotment in Sy.No.99, as per the 2011 report. Despite several representations and a favorable directive via Memo dated 28.01.2021, no action was taken.

(a) It is further submits that following a writ petition in W.P.

No. 30108 of 2022, this Court directed respondent No.2 to consider the representations. However, the respondents, relying on a report dated 26.08.2022, rejected the petitioner’s claim citing (i) lack of cultivation by the petitioner or his mother and (ii) ineligibility under Government Memo dated 18.06.2012, which proposes restrictions on land assignment within 1.5 km of municipal limits. The petitioner contends that the memo lacks legal finality, was misapplied and the rejection was passed without affording personal hearing.

(b) Learned counsel further submits that the mother of the petitioner died on 17.08.2012 and the petitioner made several representations dated 08.08.2018, 03.01.2021 and 10.03.2021 to the Minister for Forest and Environment, Law and Endowment requesting to allot alternate land to an extent of Ac.3-5 Gts., in Sy.No.62PP of Kanala Village, Bellampally Mandal, Mancherial District. However, vide Memo dated 28.01.2021 in Rc.No.B/56/2021, the Tahsildar, Bellampally Mandal directed the Mandal Surveyor, Bellampally and Girdvar Bellampally to enquire and submit compliance report in pursuance of the letter of the Minister for Forest, Law and Endowments dated 04.01.2021 stating that unfortunately the land assigned to the mother of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.3.50 Gts., in Sy.No.62 was allotted to others and a request made to identify the alternate Government land. Despite the same, no action has been taken by the respondents and as such the petitioner is constrained to file another representation on 14.06.2022 to the respondent No.2 to take necessary action in allotting the alternate land.

(c) It is further submitted that the original assignment was cancelled due to official oversight, not on account of any lapse by the petitioner's family.