IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD *****

Between:

Gorla Pochaiah …Petitioner AND

1. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and three others …Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 23.07.2025 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

1. Whether Reporters of Local : Yes/No newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment ?

2. Whether the copies of judgment : Yes/No may be marked to Law Reports/Journals

3. Whether Their Lordship/Ladyship : Yes/No wish to see the fair copy of judgment _____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH + WRIT PETITION No.10488 of 2017 %Dated 23.07.2025 Between :

# Gorla Pochaiah …Petitioner and

1. $ The The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and three others …Respondents ! Counsel for Petitioner : Sri L.Preetham Reddy ^ Counsel for Respondents : Learned Assistant Government Pleader For Assignment < GIST :

> HEAD NOTE :

? Cases referred :

1. 2004 (2) ALD 451

2. 1999 (6) ALT 322 (SB)

3. 2011 (5) ALT 119 4. (1978) 1 SCC 405 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.10488 OF 2017

ORDER:

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignment appearing for the respondents and perused the material on record.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was assigned the land admeasuring Ac.2- 20 guntas in Sy.No.951/2 of Husnabad Village and Mandal, Siddipet District and granted final patta certificate by the then MRO, Husnabad in proceedings No.A/12628/67 and the petitioner has been cultivating the said land from 1967 onwards. The name of the petitioner was mutated in the revenue records and he was given pattadar passbook and title deed. The petitioner also obtained agricultural loan in respect of the said land from the District Cooperative Central Bank, Husnabad for the purpose of doing agriculture and the loan amount of Rs.37,600/- was also waived by the Government of India under the Loan Waiver Scheme, 2008. Thus the name of the petitioner was recorded as pattadar and possessor in Revenue Records. Thereafter, the respondents with an intention to construct 2 Bed Room Houses, tried to dispossess the petitioner from his land but the petitioner refused to hand over the same. In view of the same, the respondents made allegations and resorted resumption proceedings under Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for brevity “POT Act, 1977”). Without prior intimation, a notice dated 02.03.2017 was affixed on the house of the petitioner to stop the cultivation within seven (7) days of receipt of the said notice. In the said notice, a reference was made regarding the inquiry report dated 28.02.2017 of Mandal Revenue Observer and Village Revenue Officer, Husnabad. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an explanation dated 09.03.2017. Without considering the explanation of the petitioner, the respondent No.4 herein issued impugned resumption proceedings No.B/317/2017, dated 18.03.2017 by invoking powers under Section 4(1) and 4(1) (a) of POT Act, 1977.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that if the respondents want to acquire the land of the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled for payment of compensation of market value on par with absolute owners. The respondents cannot acquire the land of the petitioner without initiating land acquisition proceedings and without making payment of compensation and further submits that the petitioner is entitled for compensation on par with the private lands and requested to allow the writ petition.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner in support of his contentions placed reliance on the following Judgments:

1. Land Acquisition Officer-Cum-Revenue Divisional Officer v. Mekala Pandu

2. B.Adinarayana Murthy v. Collector

3. Jinka Chendrayudu v. Joint Collector

1 2004 (2) ALD 451

2 1999 (6) ALT 322 (S.B.)

3 2011 (5) AL