Telangana HC asks petitioner to move Collector with evidence in RGIA land encroachment case
Telangana High Court declined to intervene directly in alleged encroachment of RGIA-acquired land, directing the petitioner to submit a detailed complaint with supporting material to the Rangareddy District Collector for action under law
Hyderabad: Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin of the Telangana High Court on Monday observed that where there is complete and cogent material to substantiate allegations of land encroachment relating to the land acquired for the Rajiv Gandhi International Airport, an appropriate complaint must be placed before the District Collector, who is the competent authority under law.
The Bench noted that the representation earlier submitted by the petitioner lacked necessary particulars and supporting material. It therefore permitted the petitioner to submit a fresh and comprehensive representation to the District Collector concerned, in accordance with the Telangana Land Encroachment Act, within a period of four weeks.
The court directed that upon receipt of such a representation, the District Collector shall examine the matter, provide an opportunity of hearing to all stakeholders, and thereafter pass an appropriate order strictly in accordance with law. The directions were issued while disposing of a public interest litigation filed by K Krishna of Thukkuguda.
In the PIL, the petitioner alleged that encroachments had taken place over about 97 acres of land situated in several survey numbers, including 93, 94, 95, 770, 771, 772, 773, 778 and 779, in Maheshwaram mandal of Rangareddy district. According to the petitioner, the land had originally been acquired for the Airports Authority of India. The petitioner further alleged that a private entity, Vertex Developers LLP, had secured construction permissions from the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority by relying on false or misleading documentation in respect of the alleged encroached land.
During the hearing, counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that despite an earlier complaint made to the Rangareddy District Collectorate, no concrete action had been taken, even though the Collector is the designated authority to deal with encroachments under the statute.
After considering the submissions, the Bench clarified that any renewed complaint must clearly specify the details of the land acquisition, including the time, manner and purpose for which the land was acquired, as well as precise particulars of the alleged encroachments. With these observations and directions, the court brought the proceedings to a close.
