Prl. Secy., Rev. Dept. 2 Ors. vs P. Amrutha 50 Ors.
2022 Latest Caselaw 1595 Tel

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

             I.A.No.2 of 2017 (WAMP.No.2865 of 2017)
                               In/And
                  WRIT APPEAL No.1545 OF 2017

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

       The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated

11.06.2015

        passed      by     the    learned       Single     Judge    in

W.P.No.7959 of 2012.

The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the writ

petitioners, who were small agriculturists surviving on labour,

came up before the learned Single Judge by filing the writ

petition for issuance of a direction to the State Government, the

District Collector, Medak District and the Tahsildar, Hathnoora

Mandal, Medak District, not to proceed with the

construction/erection of 132/33 KV Sub-Station in the land

bearing Survey No.291 situated at Palpanoor Village, Hathnoora

Mandal, Medak District, ignoring the house site pattas granted

to the writ petitioners. When the matter was being argued, the

learned Government Advocate, on instructions, conceded before

the learned Single Judge that the Tahsildar will allot alternative

plots of the same size to the writ petitioners and in those

circumstances, the writ petition was disposed of directing

allotment within a period of three months.

The order was passed by the learned Single Judge in the

year 2015. Undisputedly it was a case of daily wagers, who

were earlier allotted land and were shifted on account of

construction/erection of 132/33 KV Sub-Station and based

upon the concession, the writ petition was disposed of. Now,

the State Government has taken somersault and has challenged

the order which was passed on their consent. The State

Government, in the present case, woke up from slumber after

740 days and has filed the present writ appeal with a delay of

740 days. The day-to-day delay has not been explained, except

for making a bald statement that the Districts were bifurcated.

This Court, as the day-to-day delay has not been

explained, is of the opinion that the present application for

condonation of delay on the ground of such lame excuse

deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.

Resultantly, the writ appeal stands rejected.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_______________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 29.03.2022 JSU