Telangana High Court
B.Yedukondala Raju, vs The State Of Telangana on 28 August, 2024
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT: HYDERABAD
CORAM:
* HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
+ WRIT PETITION No.19941 OF 2024
% Delivered on: 28-08-2024
Between:
# Mr. B. Yedukondala Raju & another .. Petitioners
Vs.
$ The State of Telangana, rep.by Principal
Secretary (Revenue), Secretariat, Hyd. & others .. Respondents
! For Petitioners : Mr. P. Rama Sharana Sharma
^ For Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. L. Ravinder, learned Asst.
Govt. Pleader for Revenue
For Respondent Nos.4 to 6 : Mr. M.V. Hanumantha Rao
< Gist :
> Head Note :
? Cases Referred :
2
KL,J
W.P. No.19941 of 2024
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.19941 OF 2024
ORDER:
Heard Mr. P. Rama Sharana Sharma, learned counsel for the
petitioners, Mr. L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader
for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr.
M.V. Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 6.
2. Petitioner No.1 is the husband of petitioner No.2. They are
claiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors of the land
admeasuring Acs.3.00 guntas in Survey No.294, situated at
Khanapuram Village, Khammam Urban Mandal and District. They
have purchased the said property under registered sale deed bearing
document No.8094 of 2005, dated 26.05.2004, and document No.9743
of 2005, dated 27.03.2004 executed by the father of respondent Nos.4
to 6 i.e., Chandrakani Sathyanarayana.
i) Respondent Nos.4 to 6 and their mother filed a suit vide O.S.
No.35 of 2009 against the petitioners herein seeking cancellation of
the aforesaid sale deeds and recovery of possession. The same was
dismissed on 31.07.2019 by learned VII Additional District Judge,
KL,J
Khammam. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and decree,
respondent Nos.4 to 6 filed an appeal vide A.S. No.69 of 2020 and the
same is pending before this Court. Thus, there are disputes between
the petitioners and respondent Nos.4 to 6 with regard to mutation
proceedings issued in favour of the petitioners in respect of the subject
property. W.P. No.18489 of 2013 filed by respondent Nos.4 to 6
against the Government and the petitioners is also pending.
ii) It is the further contention of the petitioners that with an
intention to develop the subject land into residential plots, they have
applied for conversion proceedings converting the subject land from
agriculture to non-agriculture and obtained proceedings dated
03.10.2022 under the provisions of the Telangana Agricultural Land
(Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purpose) Act, 2006 (for short
'NALA'). Basing on the said conversion proceedings, the petitioners
have applied for Layout Application on 09.11.2022. Vide letter, dated
28.12.2022, respondent No.3 informed respondent No.2 that in view
of the order passed by this Court, it is not appropriate to consider the
issue of Layout Approval at this juncture. Basing on the said letter,
respondent No.2 held up the proposals. Therefore, the petitioners
herein have filed a writ petition vide W.P. No.5299 of 2023. Vide
KL,J
order dated 03.04.2023, this Court directed Municipal Commissioner
to process the Layout Application. Vide W.P. No.16729 of 2023,
respondent Nos.4 to 6 herein challenged the conversion proceedings
issued in favour of the petitioners. Vide order, dated 30.06.2023, this
Court directed to maintain status quo. The petitioners filed vacate stay
application vide I.A.No.2 of 2023 in the said writ petition. The
petitioners herein have also filed a writ appeal vide W.A. No.41 of
2024 challenging the said status quo order. The said writ appeal was
disposed of directing to take up said vacate stay application
expeditiously. Vide order dated 30.04.2024 in I.A. No.2 of 2023 in
W.P. No.16729 of 2023, a Division Bench of this Court while
vacating the said status quo order, permitted respondent Nos.4 to 6 to
avail the statutory appeal within fifteen (15) days from the date of
receipt of copy of the said order.
iii) In compliance with the said order, respondent Nos.4 to 6
preferred an appeal before respondent No.3 in terms of Section - 8 of
the NALA. They have also sought for suspension of NALA
proceedings dated 03.10.2022 issued by the Tahsildar, Khammam
Urban Mandal converting the subject land from agriculture to non-
agriculture. Respondent No.3 in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in NALA Appeal
KL,J
No.81/1650/2024 granted interim stay of all NALA orders issued vide
proceedings Nos.2200820369 and 2200820 issued by the Tahsildar,
Khammam Urban Mandal until disposal of the main appeal.
Respondent No.3 has also issued notice dated 14.06.2024 posting the
said appeal to 22.06.2024 for hearing.
3. Challenging the said order and notice issued by respondent
No.3, the petitioners herein filed the present writ petition contending
as follows:
i. Respondent No.3 is not an Appellate Authority in terms of
Section - 8 of the NALA. He has no power to grant interim
stay.
ii. Vide order dated 30.04.2024 in I.A. No.2 of 2023 in W.P.
No.16729 of 2023, the Division Bench of this Court vacated the
interim order dated 30.06.2023 in W.P. No.16729 of 2023 and
granted permission to respondent Nos.4 to 6 to prefer statutory
appeal. Therefore, the impugned suspension order, interim
suspension order passed by respondent No.3 is contrary to the
said order.
KL,J
4. Whereas, respondent Nos.4 to 6 filed counter contending
that respondent No.3 is the Appellate Authority in terms of Section - 8
of the NALA and he has power to grant interim order. It is not in
violation of the order dated 30.04.2024 in I.A. No.2 of 2023 in W.P.
No.16729 of 2023 passed by the Division Bench of this Court. The
petitioners instead of participating in the said appeal, filed the present
writ petition challenging the notice issued by respondent No.3 and the
interim order passed therein.
5. In the light of the aforesaid rival submissions, it is apt to
refer that Section - 2 (f) of NALA deals with definition of "Collector",
and it is extracted as under:
"2 (f) "Collector" means the District Collector in
whose jurisdiction the agricultural land for which
conversion is applied for is situated and also
includes Joint Collector or any other officer not
below the rank of the Joint Collector authorized by
the Government to exercise the powers and
perform the functions of the District Collector
under this Act."
6. Section - 2 (g) of NALA deals with definition of "Revenue
Divisional Officer", and it is extracted as under:
KL,J
"2 (g) "Revenue Divisional Officer" means the
Revenue Divisional Officer including Sub-
Collector or Asst. Collector in whose jurisdiction
the agricultural land or a part thereof is situated
and includes any officer not below the rank of a
Revenue Divisional Officer empowered by the
Government to exercise the powers and perform
the functions of the Revenue Divisional Officer
under this Act."
7. Section - 8 of NALA envisages that any person aggrieved by
an order of the Tahsildar may file an appeal before the Collector
within sixty days of receipt of such order by the applicant.
8. As discussed above, vide order dated 30.04.2024 the
Division Bench of this Court while vacating status quo order dated
30.06.2023 granted permission to respondent Nos.4 to 6 to prefer
statutory appeal in terms of Section - 8 of the NALA. Now, in
compliance with the said order, respondent Nos.4 to 6 preferred the
appeal before respondent No.3 vide NALA Appeal No.81/1650/2024.
9. In the light of the above said facts, the only issue that falls
for consideration before this Court is, whether respondent No.3 has
KL,J
power to entertain the appeal filed by respondent Nos.4 to 6 in terms
of Section - 8 of the NALA.
10. As per Section - 8 of the NALA, appeal lies to the
'Collector'. As per Section - 2 (f) of the NALA, Collector includes
'Joint Collector or any other Officer not below the rank of the Joint
Collector authorized by the Government to exercise the powers and
perform the functions of the District Collector'. Likewise, Section - 2
(g) of the NALA defines 'Revenue Divisional Officer', and it means
the Revenue Divisional Officer including Sub-Collector or Assistant
Collector and includes any Officer not below the rank of a Revenue
Divisional Officer empowered by the Government to exercise the
powers and perform the functions of the Revenue Divisional Officer
under the NALA. In view of the same, respondent No.3, being the
Revenue Divisional Officer is not a 'Collector'. He is only a Revenue
Divisional Officer. Section - 2 (f) says Collector includes 'Joint
Collector', but not Sub-Collector or Assistant Collector. Therefore,
RDO cannot be treated as Joint Collector.
11. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, respondent No.3
being the Revenue Divisional Officer has no jurisdiction to entertain
KL,J
the appeal filed by respondent Nos.4 to 6 in terms of Section - 8 of the
NALA. Thus, the notice dated 14.06.2024 issued by respondent No.3
in NALA Appeal No.81/1650/2024 is liable to be set aside and
accordingly the same is set aside. The consequential interim stay of
NALA orders issued by respondent No.3 vide proceedings
Nos.2200820369 and 2200820 issued by the Tahsildar, Khammam
Urban Mandal in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in NALA Appeal
No.81/1650/2024 are also liable to be set aside and accordingly the
same are set aside. However, liberty is granted to respondent Nos.4 to
6 to prefer appeal before respondent No.2 - District Collector within
fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
12. The present Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. But, in
the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in
the writ petition shall stand closed.
_________________
K. LAKSHMAN, J
28th August, 2024
Note: L.R. copy be marked.
(B/O.) Mgr
