Mohd. Sirajuddin vs State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 1420 Tel

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

                      WRIT APPEAL No.195 OF 2022

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

        The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated

02.12.2019          passed        by     the      learned       Single    Judge     in

W.P.No.23431 of 2019.

        The appellant/writ petitioner came up before the learned

Single Judge stating that he is having some workshop in the

cellar of Hi-line Apartments, bearing premises No.C-14, Road

No.12, Shaikpet Village, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.                            It was

stated by him that in front of the workshop, there is a vacant

land admeasuring 80 square yards and an application was

preferred by him for the allotment of land before the Collector.

The land was not allotted and various representations were

submitted by him from time to time. He has approached this

Court earlier also by filing a writ petition i.e., W.P.No.27544 of

2002. The writ petition was disposed of on 10.09.2008 with a

direction to consider the representation preferred by the

petitioner.       As nothing was being done in the matter, the

present       second       writ      petition      has      been      preferred   i.e.,
                                        2




W.P.No.23431 of 2019 and the learned Single Judge in

paragraph 5 of the order has held as under:-

      "5. During the course of hearing, it is fairly submitted by the
      learned counsel for petitioner that no application was made in
      terms of G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.2.2008. Having regard to
      the fact that the writ petition filed earlier was disposed of with
      a direction to first respondent to dispose of the application, if

any, submitted by the petitioner for regularization of his possession in terms of G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.2.2008, it is not open to the petitioner to seek the same relief in a subsequent writ petition without making application under the said G.O. Further, the petitioner was dispossessed long ago and as per the regularization scheme, a person must be in possession and enjoyment of the structure raised by him. These parameters are not fulfilled in this case. Therefore the petitioner is not entitled for any relief at this stage and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed."

The order of the learned Single Judge reflects that the

appellant/writ petitioner is not in possession of the land in

question, it is a Government land and he also does not fulfil the

requirement for the purpose of regularisation, as he is not in

possession of the land in terms of G.O.Ms.No.166 dated

16.02.2008. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court,

the order passed by the learned Single Judge does not warrant

any interference. In case of a Government land, the same has to

be allotted by way of a transparent procedure i.e., either by way

of tender or by way of auction and it cannot be allotted by

submitting a representation. This Court does not find any

reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single

Judge.

Resultantly, the writ appeal stands dismissed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_______________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J

23.03.2022 JSU