A. Buchi Babu vs State of Andhra Pradesh

K.Sarath, J

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in constructing a water tank in the land of the petitioners in an extent of 1000 Sq.Yards situated in Survey No.238, situated at Isnapur Village of Patancheru Mandal of Sanga Reddy District, erstwhile Medak District, without issuing any notice and sought a direction to the respondents to deliver vacant possession of the same to the petitioners.

Heard Sri G.Ravi Mohan, learned Senior Counsel appearing  for  the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, learned Assistant Government Pleader for  Panchayat  Raj and  Rural Development and the learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and perused the record.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the owners and possessors of the of the land to an extent of Ac.1.08 guntas in Survey No.238 situated at Isnapur Village, Patancheru Mandal of Sanga Reddy, erstwhile Medak District, having purchased the same through document Nos.2532/2000 dated 31.05.2000 and since the date of purchase the petitioners are in absolute possession and enjoyment of the same. The said land was kept fallow without any agricultural activity therein nor constructed any building. On 15.03.2013 when the petitioners visited the subject property they noticed that a huge water tank was built by the Panchayat Raj Department by utilizing an extent of 1000 Sq. Yards out of the subject land of the petitioners, without issuing any notice or initiating acquisition proceedings for acquiring the same and said action of the respondents is arbitrary and illegal and sought a direction to deliver the possession of the said land to the petitioners.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, basing on the counter filed by the respondent No.6 would submit that as the Developers did not inform about the frequent transfers of open places earmarked for public utility to the notice of the Gram Panchayat and the same was not aware by the Gram Panchayat. The Gram Panchayat, Isnapur, sticking to the approved layout and keeping in view of public demand for supply of drinking water has sent proposal to construct a sump-well with a capacity of 200 Lakhs Liters in the year 2009-10 and accordingly the RWS Engineers have completed the work in the year,2012 and the sump-well was constructed purely utilization of drinking water to the public and there are no merits in the writ petition and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue basing on the counter filed by the respondent No.5 would submit that as per revenue record for the year 1955-58 i.e. Seesala Phaani the total extent of land in Sy.No.238 is Ac.13.07 Guntas which stands on the name of Smt.Radha Bai and for the year 2000-01 the names of one Kosana Chinna Venkateswarlu and his wife, N.Bhakta Vatsala Devi, were recorded as Pattadars to an extent of Ac.2.08 guntas each in respect of land bearing Sy.No.238/LU and 238/LUU. As per DTCP Technical approval for layout during the year, 1998 and the sale transaction was found vide document No.1574/1999 in favour of Sri Satya Dev to an extent of Ac.1.00 Guntas, who in turn executed in favour of the petitioners herein, thus the executants viz., Kosana Chinna Venkateswaralu and his wife executed the sale deeds in favour of third parties after they got Technical approval of layout by DTCP being the land not falling under HMDA limits by that time. The total extent of land situated in Sy.No.238 was converted into layout by leaving 10% of land for public utility and roads as confirmed by the Gram Panchayat, Isnapur. Once such layout was finalized and the development takes place, the layout virtually becomes unalterable. The land reserved for road and open spaces are utilized for such purposes and none else.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue further submits that even after converting the entire extent of Ac.4.16 guntas in the shape of layout, the Pattadars have sold out Ac.1.00 of land vide document No.1574/1999, but their names have been continued in the revenue records and subsequently mutation was also granted in favour of the petitioners without verifying the sale transactions took place as well as land converted in to plots and the names of the petitioners still existing in Dharani, but there is no land left over at present. Further, the public utility space of approved lay-out has been taken up for construction of sump @ 2.00 Lac liters capacity for supply of Manjeera Drinking water to the public and completed the construction of the same in the year 2012 and there are no merits in the writ petition and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

After hearing both sides, this Court is of the considered view that there is no dispute about the ownership of the petitioners in respect of the subject property. At the time of hearing on 11.09.2024 this Court directed the respondent No.5/Tahsildar, Patancheru, to produce the relevant record with regard to DTCP approved layout in respect of the subject property. Accordingly, on 03.10.2024 the respondent No.5 produced a letter of the Panchayat Secretary, IsnapurVillageinLetterNo. No.GP/ISP/01/Oct./2024, dated 01.10.2024, addressed to the respondent No.5, wherein it stated that in the year 1997-98 a lay out name Shirdi Shills was formed based on the tentative DTCP layout C.No.3314/98/H2 of DTP, Hyderabad, ref.No.18/A/GP1/97-98 in Sy.No.238 to an extent of Ac.4.40 guntas and to an extent of Ac.19.76 Cents in Sy.No.251 by leaving 10% of the open space for public utilities i.e. 0.44 Cents in Sy.No.238 and Ac.01.975 Cents in Sy.No.251 and further stated that no records are available in their office.

As per the records submitted by the respondent No.5 along with the letter dated 01.10.2024 clearly shows that the respondent No.5 filed approved lay out with regard to Sy.No.251 of Isnapur Village only, but failed to file the approved layout with regard to Survey No.238 of Isnapur Village. Without any approved layout in respect of suit schedule property, the respondents cannot claim the land belonging to the petitioners as open space meant for the public purpose and they cannot construct water tank in the private land of the petitioners. The respondents failed to show any document with regard to the approved layout in respect of Sy.No.238, in which the land of the petitioners is situated. If the respondents wants to construct water tank for the public purpose, they have to follow the procedure for acquiring the land as contemplated under the Land Acquisition Act. The respondents without following the procedure constructed a water tank in the land of the petitioners stating that it was constructed in open space earmarked for public utility as per the approved lay out, but failed to produce the approved lay-out in respect of the subject property.

The water tank constructed by the respondents is utilizing for the public purpose and the same cannot be directed to demolish as prayed by the petitioner. In view of the same, the petitioners are entitled for land acquisition compensation for the acquired land by the respondents.

At the time of arguments the learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat submits that the respondents have acquired only 120 Sq.yards, but not 1000 Sq.Yards as claimed by the petitioners. The extent of land acquired by the respondents for the construction of water tank cannot be decided by this Court in the instant writ petition. The respondents have to conduct survey of the land used for construction of the water tank including the affected area, in the presence of the petitioners and have to pay compensation to the petitioners with interest from the date of acquisition of the land.

In view of the above findings, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to conduct a survey in the presence of the petitioners and initiate land acquisition proceedings in respect of the extent of land in which water tank was constructed including the affected area in Sy.No.238 situated at Isnapur Village, Patancheru Mandal of Sanga Reddy District, erstwhile Medak District and pay compensation to the petitioners with interest from the date of acquisition. The entire process shall be completed within three (3) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall also stand closed.