Telangana High Court
Ponnaboina Laxmi vs The State Of Telangana, on 19 February, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.4905 of 2025
ORDER:
It is stated that the petitioner was assigned the
agricultural land admeasuring Acs.2.00 guntas in Sy.No.628/6,
situated at Pamukunta Village, Rajampet Mandal, Yadadri-
Bhuvanagiri District, in terms of the policy laid down by the
Government under G.O.Ms.No.1406, dated 25.07.1958. It is
further stated that the petitioner is enjoying the said property
and she has not violated the terms and conditions of the
assignment patta. It is further stated that the petitioner's
husband also owns land to an extent of Ac.0.20 guntas in
Sy.No.628/4 of the same village. Thus, the petitioner and her
husband are in possession of the land totalling to an extent of
Acs.2.20 guntas. The grievance of the petitioner is that
respondent No.3, to facilitate the neighbouring owners, is
making efforts to occupy or dispossess the petitioner from the
subject land for laying pathway/cart track.
2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri H.Somaiah Ezra Shastri, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for Assignment appearing for the
CVBR, J
Wp_4905_2025
respondents and with their consent, this writ petition is being
disposed of at the admission stage.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no
pathway as depicted in the Village Revenue Map from the lands
of the petitioner and in the absence of existing road/path way,
the respondents are not having any power to take possession of
the petitioner's land without following the procedure. In
support of his contention, he relied upon the judgment of the
Apex Court in LAO-cum-RDO, Chevella Division,
Domalaguda, Hyderabad v. Mekala Pandu 1 wherein it is held
that the assignees are entitled to compensation on par with the
pattadars of the land and only after payment of compensation
the respondent authorities will have power to acquire the
assigned lands.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignment
has not disputed the fact that the petitioner was assigned the
land to an extent of Acs.2.00 guntas and the petitioner's
husband was pattadar of the land admeasuring Ac.0.20 guntas
2004(2) ALD 451
CVBR, J
Wp_4905_2025
and the same is in possession of the petitioner and her
husband.
5. It is settled law that once the land has been assigned to
landless poor person, the respondents are not having any power
to resume the same unless it is found, after enquiry, that the
assignee has violated the terms and conditions of the
assignment patta. If the said assigned land is required for
public purpose, the respondents have to initiate proceedings
under the provisions of the the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013. Except following the above procedure, the respondents
are not having any power to resume the land, which has been
assigned to the petitioner.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court deems it appropriate
to dispose of this writ petition directing respondent No.3 not to
interfere with the possession of the petitioner and her husband
over the land admeasuring Acs.2.20 guntas in Sy.Nos.628/6
and 628/4 situated at Pamukunta Village, Rajapet Mandal,
Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District, in any manner. However, if the
petitioner violates any terms and conditions of the assignment
CVBR, J
Wp_4905_2025
patta the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate action in
accordance with law.
7. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed
of. There shall be no order as to costs.
8. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,
shall stand closed.
________________________________
JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
19.02.2025
gkv
