The State Of Telangana And 3 Others vs P. Laxminarayana Reddy
2021 Latest Caselaw 1640 Tel

Item No.20



       THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                          AND
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
                          W.A.No.265 OF 2020
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)

1.    The matter was taken up yesterday. But, because the affidavit filed

by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vikarabad Division was not record,

the appeal was adjourned for today. The affidavit dated 26.04.2021 is on

record wherein, it has been stated that the appellants have verified the

records relating to availability of vacant land free of encumbrance and

without litigation for being allocated to the respondent. As per the

records, land to an extent of Acs.2.00 in Sy.No.280 and another parcel of

land to an extent of Acs.2.00 in Sy.No.164 is available in Morangapally

Village of Mominpet Mandal. The other alternate land offered by the

appellants is from out of the parcel of land measuring Acs.8.00 in

Sy.No.118 of Yenkepally Village, classified as pormaboke.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent states that his client is willing

to accept the land measuring Acs.4.00 from out of Acs.8.00 in

Sy.No.118 of Yenkepally Village, but date and time may be fixed for the

said purpose.

3. The appellants shall issue the proceedings for allocation of the

parcel of land measuring Acs.4.00 situated in Sy.No.118 of Yenkepally

Village along with a site plan indicating the demarcation of the said

parcel of land within two weeks from today whereafter, the actual

physical possession of the subject land shall be handed over on site by

the Tahsildar to the respondent within two weeks from the date of

issuance of the proceedings.

5. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellants requests that the

costs of Rs.25,000/- imposed on the appellant No.1 in the writ petition

may be waived. He clarifies that costs of Rs.20,000/- imposed on the

appellant No.1 in the contempt case has already been handed over to the

respondent.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that if the appellants

adhere to the timeline for completing the proceedings relating to

allocation of the land and handing over of possession, then he has no

objection to the waiver of the costs imposed in the writ proceedings.

7. It is made clear that in the event any of the appellants commit a

default in adhering to the timeline fixed by this court in relation to

completion of the proceedings for handing over possession of the parcel

of land to the respondent and/or in handing over the actual physical

possession thereof to him, then the appellant No.1 shall pay the costs of

Rs.25,000/- to the respondent as imposed in the impugned common

order.

8. The present appeal is closed along with the pending applications,

if any.

_________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________ B.VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 15.06.2021 Lrkm/pln