Telangana High Court

Mrs. Rekhala Bhagyamma vs State Of Telangana And 3Others on 4 September, 2024

                                                             Page 1 of 10
                                                                    SK,J



     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
          WRIT PETITION No.31253 of 2022
ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

"....to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the proceedings No.GP/ITKUPD/01/2022 dated 04.07.2022 passed by the respondent No.4 in seizing the Gramakantam land of the petitoner to an extent of 151 Sq.Yards, bearing H.No.5-122, situated at Itukulapadu village, Shaligowraram Mandal of Nalgonda District during the pendency of W.P.no.23879 of 2022 as arbitrary, without jurisdiction, irrational, illegal, without any known procedure and in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the petitioner's possession over the subject plot ......."

2. Heard the learned Counsel for petitioner and the

learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat

Raj and Rural Development and the learned Standing

Counsel for Gram Panchayat appearing for the

respondents and perused the material available on

record.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would

submit the petitioner is the owner and possessor of

SK,J

House property bearing No.5-122 situated at

Itukalapad village of Shaligowraram Mandal of

Nalgonda District and the respondent No.4 also

issued ownership certificate on 18.03.2017 in favour

of the petitioner in respect of the subject property and

the petitioner has also been paying taxes thereon.

Originally the subject property was Grama Kantam

land which was allotted to her father-in-law. While it

being so, after death of husband of the petitioner,

some of the villagers having developed mal-intention

against the petitioner, who is a lonely lady, resorting

to coercive moves and demolished the compound wall.

Thereafter the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S.No.85 of

2017 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Nakrekal and

obtained status quo order vide I.A.No.209 of 2017 on

04.07.2017. Thereafter the petitioner also filed a

criminal case against the villagers, who damaged her

compound wall and the same has been registered as

FIR No.18/2018 of Shaligowraram P.S.

SK,J

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would

further submit that the respondent No.4 issued

Notice to the petitioner on 02.05.2022 calling for

explanation for which the petitioner submitted her

explanation narrating the facts, however, without

passing any orders on the explanation submitted by

the petitioner the employees of the respondent No.4

along with some villagers demolished the structures

of the house of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the

same the petitioner filed W.P.No.23879 of 2022 and

this Court passed interim orders on 26.05.2022

directing the respondents not to interfere with the

possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the

Grama kantam land bearing H.No.5-122 including

the vacant area and also directed the petitioner to

submit her explanation along with the documents.

Accordingly, the petitioner submitted her explanation

on 14.06.2022. Even after receiving the reply the

respondent No.4 issued another notice on

17.06.2024, for which the petitioner again replied on

SK,J

21.06.2022. Thereafter the respondent No.4 passed

impugned orders seizing the petitioner's property.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would

further submit that the house of the petitoner and

houses of 138 families others were submerged in

Moosi Reservoir and the Government allotted house

sites in the Grama Kantam land and all of them have

constructed houses and started living in their

respective houses by paying house taxes. The father-

in-law of the petitioner and his elder brother Sri

Veeraiah were allotted plot Nos.33 and 34 respectively

and on the west side both of them have constructed

a common compound wall leaving space on the east

side for using as front yard. The father-in-law and

husband of the petitioner, after demise of Rekala

Veeraiah, demolished the existing house and

constructed new house on the site of Rekala Veeraiah

and house site of the father-in-law of the petitioner

was left open for utilization of the tractor parking.

SK,J

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would

further submit that as per Section 58 of Gram

Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 exempted the Grama

Kantam lands, temple sites and individual houses

from the list of Gram Panchayat property as such the

Gram Panchayat has no jurisdiction to interfere with

the Grama Kantam lands, temple sites and individual

houses and therefore, requested the Court to allow

the writ petition by setting aside the impugned orders

dated 04.07.2022.

7. The learned Counsel for the petitioner in

support of his contentions placed reliance on the

following Judgments:

1. Sigadapu Vijaya Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 1

2. Victory Bar and Restaurant, Chittoor District V. State of Andhra Pradesh 2

3. Kusume Subba Raju and others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 3

8. The learned Standing Counsel for Gram

Panchayat basing on the counter filed by the

1 2015(4) ALD 88 2 2015(4) ALD 94 3 Unreported Judgment rendered

by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in WP No.23904/2018, dated 17.02.2021

SK,J

respondent No.4 would submit that in the unanimous

resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat dated

23.08.2013 it was resolved that the subject land is

Grama Kantam land and also decided to remove the

illegal constructions made therein and also to take

possession of the same. Further, in the General Body

meeting of Gram Panchayat held on 16.02.2018 the

subject land has given to scheduled caste people to

establish the community hall. Since the petitioner

has not filed valid documents showing her rights in

respect of subject property, the respondent No.4 has

issued impugned proceedings. Since the petitioner

and her henchman did not stop the illegal

construction of wall the respondent No.4 has filed a

complaint on 27.09.2023 against the petitioner and

her henchmen in Shaligowraram P.S and there are no

merits in the writ petition and requested to dismiss

the writ petition.

SK,J

9. After hearing both sides, and on perusing the

record, this Court is of the considered view that the

respondent No.4 has issued impugned proceedings

seizing the land of the petitioner to an extent of 151

Sq.Yards in H.No.5-122, situated at Itkulapahad

Village of Shaligowraram Mandal of Nalgonda District

on the ground that said land belongs to Gram

Kantam.

10. The contention of the petitioner is that the

subject property along with open land belongs to her

father-in-law, which was allotted by the respondents

during the Moosi Floods and after death of her father-

in-law and her husband some of the villagers are

trying to occupy the vacant land of the petitioner and

thereafter with the help of Gram Panchayat trying to

evict petitioner from the subject land. Admittedly, the

respondents in their counter accepting that the

schedule land is in Grama Kantam.

SK,J

11. It is settled law that the Grama Kantam land is

not a Government land and is also not vested in

Grama Panchayat. The respondent No.4/Gram

Panchayat in their counter stated that the petitioner

encroached Grama Kantam land to an extent of 151

Sq.Yards though her father-in-law was allotted only to

an extent of 600 Sq.Yards. But the respondents failed

to produce any proceedings to show that the father-

in-law of the petitioner was allotted only 600

Sq.Yards. Moreover, once the land was classified as

Gram Kanata land the authorities of the Grama

Panchayat have no power to pass any resolution to

recover the land from the petitioner.

12. In Vunnam Bangarraju Vs. Government of

Andhra Pradesh 4 this Court held that:

"9. Grama Kantam Land is not a Government Land and there is no prohibition to undertake transactions on the said lands. In fact, Gramakantam describes the area identified for the purpose of construction of residential houses and incidental structures in

4 2014 (3) ALD 443

SK,J

village. It is neither a government land nor land vested in the village Panchayats.

Xxx

12. No stature proviso is brought to my notice which prohibit sale property standing in the name of a particular person, which is classified in the revenue records as Grama kantam ....."

(Emphasis added)

The above said Judgment was also reiterated by

the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.784 of

2018, dated: 01.08.2022, wherein it was held that the

Grama Kantam land is not a Government land and

the Grama Panchayat has no power to take over the

same. The Judgments relied on by the learned

Counsel for the petitioner also apply to the instant

writ petition.

13. In the instant case also, the suit schedule land

is a Grama Kantam land and the Gram Panchayat

have no power and authority to seizure the property