Officials told to respond in land case

Hyderabad: Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to the Revenue Department and the GHMC for non-resumption of land by the Estate Officer at General Bazar in Secunderabad. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Nagilla Srinivas. The petitioner complained that the land was initially leased by the then […]

Hyderabad: Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to the Revenue Department and the GHMC for non-resumption of land by the Estate Officer at General Bazar in Secunderabad. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Nagilla Srinivas. The petitioner complained that the land was initially leased by the then Military Estate Officer way back in 1945 for a paltry rent of Rs 10 per annum. He pointed out that the present market value of the land was Rs 7 crore. The petitioner also pointed out that though the government issued a notification in 1989 providing for terminating of such lease and show cause notice was issued in 2004, the revenue and civic authorities are not exercising their statutory powers to protect public lands. The judge granted time till September 6 for the GHMC and the government to respond.

Single-judge order: HC refuses to interfere

A two-judge panel, comprising Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice B Vijaysen Reddy, refused to interfere with the orders of a single judge on lands in Puppalaguda village, Rajendra Mandal. Kakatiya Enclave had filed a writ petition questioning the action of the revenue authorities in trying to dispossess them from 15 acres of land at Puppalaguda village and also to conduct a survey for demarcation of the land. The claim of the state was that there has been overlapping of boundaries and hence the need to re-demarcate the property. Further, during the pendency of the writ petition, the land was also surveyed by the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Record. The single judge held that the survey report of the Assistant Director to the extent of surveying the land and fixation of boundaries was thereto correct. However, to an extent of 4 acres, the single judge directed that it shall not be acted upon. The said order was challenged in appeal by the HMDA. The bench, dismissing the writ appeal, observed that there was no reason to interfere with the order of the single judge as no valid grounds were raised before the court.

---

GO 111

The panel also asked the Additional Advocate General to find out if the government was planning to revoke GO 111. It was dealing with a case filed by actor and politician Vijayashanthi challenging the auction of lands by the State government. The petition was being heard along with a petition filed by Agni Agrotech for certain exemptions from GO 111. The GO has declared a 10-km peripheral area within the catchment area of the two lakes of Osmansagar and Himayatsagar as a ‘No Development Zone’ to protect the lakes from pollution. The panel adjourned the case to Wednesday for the instructions of the government.’

---

Now you can get handpicked stories from Telangana Today on Telegram everyday. Click the link to subscribe.

Click to follow Telangana Today Facebook page and Twitter .

---