P.Anji Reddy vs Principal Secretary

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents.

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondents in acquiring land admeasuring Ac.0.35 Guntas and Ac.3.08 Guntas situated in Survey Nos.260/A and 261/AA of Basawapuram Village, Koheda Mandal, Siddipet (previously in Karimnagar District), for the purpose of construction of two bed room flats on the ground that without initiating any land acquisition proceedings, the respondents have taken over the said land.

This Court at the time of admission, on 20.08.2018, passed the following interim order:

“Admittedly, the petitioners were the original owners of the land and the pahanies show their possession of the said land, even as on 07.06.2018. Therefore, the respondents cannot, on the basis of the sale deed executed by one Ilaiah, start constructing two bed room houses in the subject land.

In view of the same, there shall be interim stay as prayed for.”

The third parties/proposed respondents filed I.A.No.2 of 2018 seeking to implead themselves as respondent Nos.8 to 18 in the main writ petition and claiming that the subject land was already sold by the grand-father of the writ petitioners under a sada sale deed, dated 14.08.1978 and the said sada sale deed was regularized through proceedings No.R.O.R/B/3916-1/2017 dated 26.11.2017 and form XIII(B) certificate was issued in favour of one Erella Ilaiah in respect of the subject land.

It is also further contended by the respondent Nos.8 to 18 that after regularization of the sada sale deed, the said Erella Ilaiah was also issued Digital Pattadar Pass book bearing No.T10100160734 vide with Katta No.1033 in respect of the subject land, together with certain other extents of land.

The respondent No.8 herein stated to have given consent for giving the subject land for construction of two bed room houses and accordingly, the unofficial respondents have proceeded for construction of two bed room flats in the subject land.

The averments made by the unofficial respondents in the counter affidavit stating that the subject land was purchased by the respondent No.8 under a sada sale deed and the same was regularized under Section 5A of Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short “the Act”) is not denied by the petitioners. But without denying the said proceedings under section 5A of the Act, 1971 and without questioning the said proceedings by initiating appropriate proceedings, it is not open for the petitioners to still contend that the petitioners are the pattadars of the subject land.

In view of the above, this Court is of the considered view that until and unless the petitioners initiate appropriate proceedings to question the regularization proceedings issued under section 5A of the Act, 1971 in favour of respondent No.8 herein, it is not open for the petitioners to seek payment of compensation in respect of the subject land or to contend that they are the pattadar of the said proceedings.

In the light of the above, the relief sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted and accordingly the writ petition is dismissed.

However, it is open for the petitioners, if they are otherwise aggrieved by the proceedings issued under section 5A of the Act, 1971 in favour of respondent No.8 or any other person in respect of the subject land by issuing appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stands closed. No costs.