Telangana High Court
M Laxmi Narsinga Rao vs State Of Telangana And 5 Others on 7 March, 2022
Author: P.Madhavi Devi
Bench: P.Madhavi Devi
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION No.12054 of 2022
ORDER:
This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the property bearing H.No.10-80, Near Post Office, Ibrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District without issuing notice to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice.
2. It is submitted by the petitioner that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject premises and he is in possession of the same since his birth. He further submitted that his father was in possession of the subject premises till his death i.e., 15.01.2007 and after the death of his father, himself and his family are in possession of the subject property without interference from any person including respondents. It is also submitted that on 04.03.2022, the 3rd respondent addressed a letter to the Collector and the Additional Collector of Ranga Reddy District, who are respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein, intimating 2 PMD,J W.P.No.12054 of 2022 that due to the widening of the road from 15 feet to 52 feet from Hospital road to Mogullakunta Bypass road undertaken by R & B, there are houses, which are old structures and are affected in the road widening and are to be removed accordingly. It is also mentioned that the houses are in the Gramakantam and therefore, notices were not issued and orally each and every house was visited and informed that the road widening is going to affect their houses and no compensation will be paid. It is also intimated that the process will be taken up with the help of the Police authorities from 05.03.2022 onwards duly clearing the encroachments on the road. When the petitioner came to know about this letter, he immediately rushed to this Court and filed this writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in possession of the property and the contentions or allegations that the property is in Gramakantam is without any basis. He submits that even if the petitioner is an unauthorized occupant, due process of 3 PMD,J W.P.No.12054 of 2022 law has to be followed and without issuing notices to the petitioner, the action of the respondents' trying to demolish the property of the petitioner is illegal and arbitrary.
4. The learned Standing Counsel Sri N.Praveen Kumar is also heard and he reiterated the contentions of the respondents as stated in the letter dated 04.03.2022.
5. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material placed on record, it is seen that the 3rd respondent has come to the conclusion that the property of the petitioner is in Gramakantam and therefore, no notice is required to be issued. However, the basis for coming to the conclusion that the house of the petitioner is on the Gramakantam is not mentioned and there is no reference to any proceedings/record basis for the conclusion so reached. There is no reference to any finding of any authority leave alone Revenue authority to come to the conclusion that the house of the petitioner is in Gramakantam. In view thereof, this Court is of the opinion that the action initiated by the 3rd respondent vide letter dated 04.03.2022 to remove the alleged 4 PMD,J W.P.No.12054 of 2022 encroachments on the road without issuing any notice to the affected parties is in clear violation of principles of natural justice. In view thereof, respondent Nos.3 to 5 are directed not to take any coercive steps against the property of the petitioner without following due process of law.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
7. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_____________________________ P.MADHAVI DEVI, J Date: 07.03.2022 KL