AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :
“…to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus holding the action of the Respondent No.4 in
interfering into the peaceful possession and enjoyment of my land and also trying to dispossess me from my land into an extent of Ac.2.00 gts, in
Sy.No.607, situated in Alagadapa Village, Miryalguda Mandal, Nalgonda District, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust in violation of Article 14, 15, 21 and 300-A
of the Constitution of India and also principles of natural justice and to consequently direct the Respondent No.4 herein not to interfere with the
peaceful possession and enjoyment of my land and also not to dispossess me from my land in an extent of Ac.2.00 gts., in Sy.No.607 situated in
Alagadapa Village, Miryalguda Mandal, Nalgonda District in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders…â€
Heard Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for revenue.
This writ petition is filed alleging that petitioner is the pattadar of land to an extent of Ac.2.00 guntas in Sy.No.607 of Alagadapa Village,
Miryalguda Mandal, Nalgonda District. His name was mutated in the revenue records, he was issued pattadar passbook and title deed and has been in
possession and enjoyment of the same. While so, petitioner alleges that respondent No. 4 i.e., Tahsildar is interfering with his possession and
enjoyment of the land.
No reasons are assigned as to how and why the revenue authorities would interfere, when petitioner asserts that it is a private patta land and the
revenue records reflect status of land as private patta/Lavoni patta and the name of petitioner is shown in Dharani Web portal. Only in two
contingencies, the revenue authorities can interfere in possession. Firstly, when the land belongs to Government and somebody is trying to occupy the
Government land or illegally occupied the Government land and secondly, the Government acquires land by following the due process or cancels the
assignment granted and orders resumption of land. None of these conditions are applied. Therefore, I do not see any reason for the petitioner to allege
interference and rush to this Court filing a writ petition in the form of anticipatory declaration against interference. If petitioner has any grievance
against the alleged interference by the revenue officials, it is open to him to complain to the higher authorities bringing to their notice that the revenue
authorities at the lower level are illegally disturbing his possession and enjoyment of the land without following due process of law.
Granting the said liberty, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.