J.Ravinder Reddy, vs The State Of Telangana,
2022 Latest Caselaw 798 Tel

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                    AND
    THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI


   WRIT PETITION (PIL) No.301 of 2017 & W.P.No.5553 of
                          2018

COMMON ORDER:        (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)


      Regard being had to the controversy involved in the

aforesaid cases, they were heard together and are being decided

by a common order.

      The facts of W.P.(PIL).No.301 of 2017 are reproduced as

under:

      The present public interest litigation has been filed by the

petitioner stating that he is a resident of Gajwel Village, Siddipet

District and the respondent - State is constructing a bus stand

outside the Gajwel town, which is at a distance of 5½ KM. It

has also been stated that the land over which the bus stand is

being constructed in Sy.No.685 of Gajwel village to an extent of

Ac.7.16 guntas is a shikam land as per the revenue record. The

revenue record of the year 2017 has been filed in support of the

aforesaid averment. Pahanies of the years 1950-51, 1955-53,

1985-86, 2005-06, 2010-11 were also been filed which describe

the land as Adavi Mamindla Kunta Shikam i.e., small tank.

The petitioner's contention is that in the light of the

judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jagpal

Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others1 decided on

28.01.2011, no such construction can take place.

A detailed and exhaustive counter affidavit has been filed

in the matter by the State Government and the affidavit reflects

that the distance between the proposed bus stand in Sy.No.685

and Gajwel town is only Ac.2.4 guntas and not 5½ kms. It has

been stated that the present bus stand is located in a very

congested locality and only six busses can park in the parking

way and therefore, keeping in view the necessity to have a

bigger bus stand, a decision has been taken by the Government

to allot Ac.3.5 guntas in Sy.No.685 to the Telangana State Road

Transport Corporation for construction of bus stand. The reply

further reveals that the so-called Adavi Mamindla Kunta was

abandoned more than 50 years back and there is a road

connecting Toopran village and Gajwel town through the same

Kunta dividing Ac.7.16 guntas. It has also been stated that on

one side of the road the land is Ac.3.5 guntas and on the other

side of the road, the land is Ac.2.10 guntas. It has also been

stated that a permanent road (bituminous) is existing over the

Civil Appeal No.1132 of 2011 @ SLP(C).No.3109 of 2011 dt, 28.01.2011

so-called Adavi Mamindla Kunta. The respondents have also

stated that as there was a need to construct a bus stand and as

the land is having ayacut, letter dated 03.07.2017 was written

to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Telangana,

for conversion of shikam land in Sy.No.685 to an extent of

Ac.7.16 guntas of Gajwel Village and Mandal into Ayan and the

Government of Telangana by order dated 08.07.2017 has

accorded permission and the land was converted into Ayan over

which a bus stand can very well be constructed. The Managing

Director of TSRTC requested the District Collector, Siddipet, to

allot suitable land to an extent of Ac.7.00 to Ac.8.00 for

construction of modern bus station at Gajwel and thereafter, a

proposal was sent and finally land admeasuring Ac.3.5 guntas

in Sy.No.685 has been allotted for construction of bus stand

and an amount of Rs.5 crores was released by the Government

of Telangana vide G.O.Rt.No.715, Planning (VI) Department,

dated 25.09.2017.

This Court has carefully gone through the documents on

record and the undisputed facts reveal that there is no such

lake in existence at present. The so-called lake/shikam land in

Sy.No.685 of Gajwal village is also having a permanent road

bifurcating the land into two pieces and the road is in existence

over the last 50 years. It is true that some of the revenue

records reflected the land as shikam land. However, in larger

public interest, the conversion of shikam land in Sy.No.685 has

already been done by the State of Telangana by an order dated

31.07.2017 and funds have been allocated for construction of

bus stand. Much has been argued before this Court by placing

reliance upon the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of Jagpal Singh (supra).

In the aforesaid case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was

certainly dealing with Gram Sabha land, Gram Panchayat land

and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 5 of the judgment has

observed that since independence over the country common

village land has been grabbed by unscrupulous persons using

muscle power, money power or political clout and the land is

not left for villagers at all.

In the present case, the situation is altogether different.

The land in question has been converted as land for

construction of a bus stand in larger public interest, which is

going to benefit the villagers as well as Gajwel town. The

judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court also makes it

very clear that the Supreme Court has directed all the State

Governments to prepare schemes for eviction of

illegal/unauthorized occupants of Gram Sabha/Gram

Panchayat/Poramboke/Shamlat land and to restore them for

common use of the villagers/village. It has also been observed

that no regularization order should be passed in respect of

illegal occupants and regularization should be permitted in

exceptional cases where lease has been granted under some

Government notification to landless labourers or members of

Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes or where there is already a

school, dispensary or other public utility on the land. In the

present case there is public utility i.e., construction of bus

stand keeping in view the expansion of population. The land

has been converted by the State Government and funds have

been allocated. Therefore, this Court does not find any reason

to allow the prayer made by the writ petitioner and the

W.P.(PIL).No.301 of 2017 deserves to be dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued

before this Court that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court has to be complied with.

There is no doubt about it. However, it is clarified that

the judgment, which, learned counsel is referring to is not a

judgment, but it is an interim order passed by the Court on

21.01.2011. Otherwise also, the present case is not a case

where some land grabbers are encroaching the Government

land. A bus stand is being constructed by the TSRTC. The land

was converted and it is not at all a lake. There is not a drop of

water over the land and a road is already in existence over the

last 50 years and the construction, which is being raised, is in

the larger public interest.

In W.P.No.5553 of 2018, learned counsel has drawn the

attention of this Court towards the judgment dated 27.11.2012

passed in W.P.No.23829 of 1997.

We are in agreement with the aforesaid judgment. The

lakes are required to be protected. However, the present case is

having a distinguishable feature. The so-called shikam land is

bifurcated by a permanent road (bituminous) and the road is in

existence over the last 50 years. Not only this, the land, which

has been allotted for construction of bus stand, does not have a

single drop of water and the conversion has already taken place

and the conversion order has been passed by the appropriate

authority. Therefore, thus in larger public interest, the smaller

public interest and the personal interest have to pave path for

the larger public interest.

Resultantly, both the writ petitions are dismissed.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There

shall be no order as to costs.

__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 21.02.2022 ES