THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Writ Appeal No.1236 of 2012
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)
Heard Mr. K.Ramakrishna, learned counsel representing
Mr. E.Madan Mohan Rao, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant
and Mr. T.Srikanth Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue
for respondents No.3 and 4.
2. In this intra court appeal, the appellant has assailed the validity
of the order dated 06.07.2012, passed by a learned Single Judge, by
which writ petition preferred by the appellant viz., W.P.No.20432
of 2012 has been dismissed.
3. Facts
giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the appellant filed the aforesaid writ petition inter alia on the ground that he had purchased premises bearing D.No.8-4-101/1/B admeasuring 986 square yards situated at Bandlaguda Kalsa Village, Bandlaguda Mandal, Ranga Reddy District vide registered sale deed dated 27.09.1997 from one Dr. Mohd. Wajid. The appellant constructed a house thereon. Thereafter, he learnt that the aforesaid land purchased by him belongs to the State Government. He, ::2::
therefore, submitted an application seeking regularization of the subject land under G.O.Ms.No.515 Revenue (Assignment) dated 19.04.2003. Admittedly, on the aforesaid application, no orders till today have been passed.
4. Appellant learnt that the respondent is seeking to erect a transformer or substation on the subject land. Thereupon, he filed the aforesaid writ petition seeking a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from erecting a transformer or sub-station on the subject land. The aforesaid writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that the appellant is not the owner of the subject land and therefore, he cannot prevent the statutory authority like A.P.Transco from utilising the Government land. However, liberty was reserved to the appellant to stake his claim for compensation in case his application for regularisation of the subject land is allowed.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that the application seeking regularisation of the subject land is still pending consideration.
::3::
6. Admittedly, the appellant is not the owner of the subject land. It is also not in dispute that the transformer has already been erected in the said land. Therefore, no relief, as prayed for by the appellant, can be granted. However, liberty has already been reserved to him to stake the claim for compensation in case his application seeking regularization of the subject land is allowed.
7. We therefore, do not find any ground to interfere with the order dated 06.07.2012, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.20432 of 2012.
8. In the result, the Writ Appeal fails and the same is, hereby, dismissed. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed.
__________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ _______________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J Date: 07.11.2023 LUR