Telangana High Court
Mrs. Rekhala Bhagyamma vs State Of Telangana And 3Others on 4 September, 2024
Page 1 of 10
SK,J
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.31253 of 2022
ORDER:
1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"....to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the proceedings No.GP/ITKUPD/01/2022 dated 04.07.2022 passed by the respondent No.4 in seizing the Gramakantam land of the petitoner to an extent of 151 Sq.Yards, bearing H.No.5-122, situated at Itukulapadu village, Shaligowraram Mandal of Nalgonda District during the pendency of W.P.no.23879 of 2022 as arbitrary, without jurisdiction, irrational, illegal, without any known procedure and in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the petitioner's possession over the subject plot ......."
2. Heard the learned Counsel for petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development and the learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat appearing for the respondents and perused the material available on record.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit the petitioner is the owner and possessor of Page 2 of 10 SK,J House property bearing No.5-122 situated at Itukalapad village of Shaligowraram Mandal of Nalgonda District and the respondent No.4 also issued ownership certificate on 18.03.2017 in favour of the petitioner in respect of the subject property and the petitioner has also been paying taxes thereon. Originally the subject property was Grama Kantam land which was allotted to her father-in-law. While it being so, after death of husband of the petitioner, some of the villagers having developed mal-intention against the petitioner, who is a lonely lady, resorting to coercive moves and demolished the compound wall. Thereafter the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S.No.85 of 2017 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Nakrekal and obtained status quo order vide I.A.No.209 of 2017 on 04.07.2017. Thereafter the petitioner also filed a criminal case against the villagers, who damaged her compound wall and the same has been registered as FIR No.18/2018 of Shaligowraram P.S. Page 3 of 10 SK,J
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the respondent No.4 issued Notice to the petitioner on 02.05.2022 calling for explanation for which the petitioner submitted her explanation narrating the facts, however, without passing any orders on the explanation submitted by the petitioner the employees of the respondent No.4 along with some villagers demolished the structures of the house of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same the petitioner filed W.P.No.23879 of 2022 and this Court passed interim orders on 26.05.2022 directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the Grama kantam land bearing H.No.5-122 including the vacant area and also directed the petitioner to submit her explanation along with the documents. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted her explanation on 14.06.2022. Even after receiving the reply the respondent No.4 issued another notice on 17.06.2024, for which the petitioner again replied on Page 4 of 10 SK,J 21.06.2022. Thereafter the respondent No.4 passed impugned orders seizing the petitioner's property.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the house of the petitoner and houses of 138 families others were submerged in Moosi Reservoir and the Government allotted house sites in the Grama Kantam land and all of them have constructed houses and started living in their respective houses by paying house taxes. The father- in-law of the petitioner and his elder brother Sri Veeraiah were allotted plot Nos.33 and 34 respectively and on the west side both of them have constructed a common compound wall leaving space on the east side for using as front yard. The father-in-law and husband of the petitioner, after demise of Rekala Veeraiah, demolished the existing house and constructed new house on the site of Rekala Veeraiah and house site of the father-in-law of the petitioner was left open for utilization of the tractor parking. Page 5 of 10
SK,J
6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would further submit that as per Section 58 of Gram Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 exempted the Grama Kantam lands, temple sites and individual houses from the list of Gram Panchayat property as such the Gram Panchayat has no jurisdiction to interfere with the Grama Kantam lands, temple sites and individual houses and therefore, requested the Court to allow the writ petition by setting aside the impugned orders dated 04.07.2022.
7. The learned Counsel for the petitioner in support of his contentions placed reliance on the following Judgments:
1. Sigadapu Vijaya Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 1
2. Victory Bar and Restaurant, Chittoor District V. State of Andhra Pradesh 2
3. Kusume Subba Raju and others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 3
8. The learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat basing on the counter filed by the 1 2015(4) ALD 88 2 2015(4) ALD 94 3 Unreported Judgment rendered by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in WP No.23904/2018, dated 17.02.2021 Page 6 of 10 SK,J respondent No.4 would submit that in the unanimous resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat dated 23.08.2013 it was resolved that the subject land is Grama Kantam land and also decided to remove the illegal constructions made therein and also to take possession of the same. Further, in the General Body meeting of Gram Panchayat held on 16.02.2018 the subject land has given to scheduled caste people to establish the community hall. Since the petitioner has not filed valid documents showing her rights in respect of subject property, the respondent No.4 has issued impugned proceedings. Since the petitioner and her henchman did not stop the illegal construction of wall the respondent No.4 has filed a complaint on 27.09.2023 against the petitioner and her henchmen in Shaligowraram P.S and there are no merits in the writ petition and requested to dismiss the writ petition.
Page 7 of 10
SK,J
9. After hearing both sides, and on perusing the record, this Court is of the considered view that the respondent No.4 has issued impugned proceedings seizing the land of the petitioner to an extent of 151 Sq.Yards in H.No.5-122, situated at Itkulapahad Village of Shaligowraram Mandal of Nalgonda District on the ground that said land belongs to Gram Kantam.
10. The contention of the petitioner is that the subject property along with open land belongs to her father-in-law, which was allotted by the respondents during the Moosi Floods and after death of her father- in-law and her husband some of the villagers are trying to occupy the vacant land of the petitioner and thereafter with the help of Gram Panchayat trying to evict petitioner from the subject land. Admittedly, the respondents in their counter accepting that the schedule land is in Grama Kantam.
Page 8 of 10
SK,J
11. It is settled law that the Grama Kantam land is not a Government land and is also not vested in Grama Panchayat. The respondent No.4/Gram Panchayat in their counter stated that the petitioner encroached Grama Kantam land to an extent of 151 Sq.Yards though her father-in-law was allotted only to an extent of 600 Sq.Yards. But the respondents failed to produce any proceedings to show that the father- in-law of the petitioner was allotted only 600 Sq.Yards. Moreover, once the land was classified as Gram Kanata land the authorities of the Grama Panchayat have no power to pass any resolution to recover the land from the petitioner.
12. In Vunnam Bangarraju Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh 4 this Court held that:
"9. Grama Kantam Land is not a Government Land and there is no prohibition to undertake transactions on the said lands. In fact, Gramakantam describes the area identified for the purpose of construction of residential houses and incidental structures in 4 2014 (3) ALD 443 Page 9 of 10 SK,J village. It is neither a government land nor land vested in the village Panchayats.
Xxx
12. No stature proviso is brought to my notice which prohibit sale property standing in the name of a particular person, which is classified in the revenue records as Grama kantam ....."
(Emphasis added) The above said Judgment was also reiterated by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.784 of 2018, dated: 01.08.2022, wherein it was held that the Grama Kantam land is not a Government land and the Grama Panchayat has no power to take over the same. The Judgments relied on by the learned Counsel for the petitioner also apply to the instant writ petition.
13. In the instant case also, the suit schedule land is a Grama Kantam land and the Gram Panchayat have no power and authority to seizure the property from the petitioner. In view of the same, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
14. In view of the above finding, the Writ Petition is allowed and the proceedings No.GP/ITKUPD/ Page 10 of 10 SK,J 01/2022 dated 04.07.2022 passed by the respondent No.4 is hereby set aside. No order as to costs.
15. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall also stand closed.
_____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH Date:04.09.2024 trr