Telangana High Court
Uppunuri Uppunoori Sambaiah, vs State Of Telangana, on 8 January, 2025
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.628 OF 2025
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking the
following relief:
".....to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate
Writ, Direction or Order declaring the actions of the 3rd
respondent - (1) in initiating proceedings under Land
Encroachment Act (2) in passing order dated 02.01.2025 vide
proceedings B1/1681/2022 and the consequential notice dated
01.01.2025 directing eviction of the petitioners within 5 days in
respect of their house property admeasuring 210 Sq.yards, in
Survey No.230, Nidamanoor Mandal, Nalgonda District despite
the petitioner long standing possession of the subject property
as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of principles of natural
justice and Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and
for other appropriate reliefs'.
2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for
the parties and with their consent this writ petition is disposed
of at the admission stage.
3. It is stated that the petitioners erected a thatched house
in NSP Camp in an extent of 210 Square Yards in survey
No.230 of Nidamanoor Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District,
having been in continuous possession of the same for the last
four decades. It is further stated that on 12.01.2015, the
petitioners made a representation to respondent No.3 for
regularization of the subject property, in accordance with
G.O.Ms.No.58 & 59/2015 dated 30.12.2024 issued by the
Government of Telangana. It is further stated that despite
fulfilling all the legal and administrative requirements for
regularization of the property, respondent No.3 issued notice
dated 12.12.2024 under Section 7 of the Land Encroachment
Act (for short "the Act") in response to which they also
submitted a reply dated 17.12.2024. The grievance of the
petitioner is that without considering the said reply,
respondent No.3 issued the impugned order dated 02.01.2025
directing eviction of the petitioner within 5 days, on the ground
that they are in unauthorized occupation of Government land.
4. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for
the parties and perused the record.
5. It is not the case of the petitioners that the respondents
have not followed the procedure prescribed under the
provisions of the Act for evicting them from the subject land.
In fact, the respondent No.3 has issued the impugned order
directing eviction of the petitioners, duly preceded by a notice
as required under the provisions of the Act.
6. Admittedly, the case of the petitioners is that they are in
possession of the subject land which is acquired by the
Government for the purpose of NSP. In catena of Judgments
of the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court, it is held that once
the lands are acquired by the Government, they are vested in
the State free from all encumbrances. Further, in the cases of
Jagpal Singh vs. State of Punjab 1, Hinch Lal Tiwari vs.
Kamala Devi 2 and V. Chandrasekharan vs. The
Administrative Officer 3, the Hon'ble Apex Court heavily came
down on the State authorities for not evicting the persons, who
are in occupation of the lands belong to/acquired by the
Government. As such, the petitioners, as a matter of right, are
not entitled either to seek regularization or to continue in
possession of the property vested in the Government.
7. Be that as it may, the present writ petition is filed by the
petitioners questioning the eviction order dated 02.01.2025
passed by respondent No.3 under Section 6 of the Act. If the
petitioners are aggrieved by the said order passed by the
Tahsildar, a statutory remedy of appeal is provided for under
(2011) 11 SCC 396
(2001) 6 SCC 496
(2012) 12 SCC 133
Section 10 of the Act. However, the petitioner, instead of
availing the said remedy, has filed the present writ petition.
8. In view of the above and since there is a remedy of appeal
as provided under the Act against the impugned order passed
by respondent No.3, this Court without expressing any opinion
on the merits of the matter, deems it appropriate to dismiss
the writ petition, by relegating the petitioners to approach the
appellate authority by way of filing an appeal as provided for
under the Act. On filing such appeal, the appellate authority
shall consider and dispose of the same, on its merits, as
expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
9. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ
petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_________________________________
JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
Dated : 08.01.2025
Note : Issue C.C.by today.
B/o.PLV
