SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 71310

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
A. Raghavender Rao – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 1054/2021



THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.1054 OF 2021

ORDER :

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the official respondents in not cancelling the assignment pattas issued in favour of the unofficial respondents over Government land in Sy. No. 667, measuring an extent of Acs. 4.04 guntas, situated at Kothur Village, Dharmaram Mandal, Peddapally District, despite recommendations from the 3rd respondent vide No. B/1463/2019, dated 06.07.2019, and the 4th respondent vide No. B2/1502/2019, dated 02.08.2019, for cancellation of the assignment pattas, as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of the principles of natural justice; and consequently, to direct the official respondents to cancel the assignment pattas issued in favour of the unofficial respondents over the said Government land.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac. 13.38 guntas in Sy. No. 669, situated at Kothur Village, Dharmaram Mandal, Peddapally District, and has been cultivating the said land for a long time. The land in Sy. No. 667, which is adjacent to the petitioner’s land in Sy. No. 669, is Government land covered with boulders and hill rocks and is not suitable for cultivation. However, pattas were issued by the Government in favour of unofficial respondents Nos. 5 to

7 in respect of Sy. No. 667.

3. He submits that although the Government issued assignment pattas, the same were not approved by the Assignment Committee. Since the petitioner’s land is adjacent to the Government land in Sy. No. 667, the unofficial respondents 5 to 7, under a false impression, are making baseless claims over the petitioner’s land in Sy. No. 669 and are causing disturbance to his cultivation.

4. He further submits that the petitioner submitted representations to the 3rd and 4th respondents, pursuant to which the 3rd respondent conducted a survey and fixed boundaries. Yet, the unofficial respondents continue to harass the petitioner. The 3rd respondent also lodged a complaint with the Station House Officer, Dharmaram, on 12.04.2016. He contends that the assignment pattas issued in favour of the unofficial respondents are not in accordance with law, as they were not approved by the Assignment Committee.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Tahsildar, Dharmaram Mandal (3rd respondent herein), based on the instructions of the 4th respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddapally, dated 02.07.2019, conducted an enquiry and submitted a report stating that Sy. No. 667 of Kothur Village comprises a total extent of Acs. 84.19 guntas of Government land. Out of this, 22 farmers have registered for an extent of Acs. 24.15 guntas. The remaining land, i.e., Acs. 69.15 guntas, consists of hills and large stones, making it unfit for cultivation.

6. The 5th respondent, Pullakolla Kanakamma, has registered her name for an extent of Ac. 1.34 guntas under Khata No. 1497, though no file number is available; however, her name is reflected in the Pahani. Similarly, the 6th respondent, Pullakolla Yellaiah, has registered for Ac. 0.20 guntas under Khata No. 1212, and the 7th respondent, Pullakolla Mallaiah, has registered for Ac. 0.30 guntas under Khata No. 1652. However, there is no corresponding registration in the Assignment Committee Register. It is further submitted that respondents 5 to 7 are cultivating only about Ac. 1.00 of land, while the remaining land is rocky and uncultivable. As per the official record, the extent of Acs.

Laoni

4.04 guntas of Government land is designated as Patta land, but there is no evidence of approval from the Assignment Committee.

7. He also submits that respondents 5 to 7, under the mistaken belief that a portion of the petitioner’s land is Government land, have encroached upon the petitioner’s land in Sy. No. 669 and are causing law and order issues.

8. It is further stated that when the Assistant Director, Land Measureme

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top