Mohammed Siraj Uddin vs Medikonda Venkat Praveen
2021 Latest Caselaw 2254 Tel

Item No.14



      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                                   AND
      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

                          W.A.No.330 of 2021

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)


1.     The present appeal is directed against an order dated

17.06.2021, passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of

W.P.No.12777 of 2021, filed by the respondent No.1/writ petitioner

questioning the inaction on the part of the respondent No.3/Gram

Panchayat in ensuring the safety of a public road situated in Pocharam

Village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District.

2. The learned Single Judge has observed in para 4 of the

impugned order that there is a dispute pending between the respondent

No.1/writ petitioner and the appellant (respondent No.3 in the writ

petition) before a competent civil court with regard to the title and

boundaries of different plots. Further observing that the respondent

No.1/writ petitioner had only sought relief against encroachment of a

public road, the writ petition has been disposed of with a direction

issued to the respondent No.5/District Collector to conduct an enquiry

with regard to the existence of any public road, as alleged by the

respondent No.1/writ petitioner and thereafter, look into the matter of

encroachment, if any, thereon by conducting a physical inspection.

On finding any encroachments, directions have been issued to remove

the same.

3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid directions, the appellant (respondent

No.3 in the writ petition) has filed the present appeal stating inter alia

that the learned Single Judge has declined to examine the objection

regarding maintainability of the writ petition filed by the respondent

No.1/writ petitioner and that there was no requirement of issuing a

writ of mandamus to the respondents authorities for verifying the

existence of a public road and encroachment, if any, thereon.

4. We do not find any merit in the submission made by learned

counsel for the appellant. The learned Single Judge has clearly

observed that there is a dispute between the appellant and the writ

petitioner regarding the title and boundaries of different plots and

therefore, refrained from going into any aspect relating to the private

lis between the parties. The directions issued have been confined to

the existence of a public road and encroachment, if any, thereon. In

view of the stand taken by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for

the Gram Panchayat that the Gram Panchayat was unable to identify

the road and assistance was sought from the Revenue Department to

do so, a limited direction has been issued to the respondent

No.5/District Collector to conduct a physical inspection of the site to

identify the public road and if a public road found to exist at the site in

question, to remove the encroachments, if any, thereon.

5. We see no reason to entertain the present appeal against the

impugned judgment, which is accordingly dismissed as meritless

along with the pending applications, if any.

______________________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 30.07.2021 JSU/PLN