C SUDHAN REDDY Vs. SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE background of all these cases is similar. The order of the learned District Judge impugned in the writ petitions is a common order and the grounds urged are common. Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of all the matters by this common order.

(2.) TAKING W. P. No. 2962 of 2003 filed by one C. Sudhan Reddy, the brief fact of the matter may be noticed. The petitioner is the owner of the premises bearing No. 24-47 (old No. 24-6/a/40) in plot No. 28. The said plot is comprised in Survey Nos. 5, 6, 8/1, 9/1, 11/1, 913/1 admeasuring 150 square yards situated at Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Malkajgiri Municipality. The petitioner allegedly purchased the said property under a registered sale deed, dated 6. 8. 1996, from one Madhusudhan Reddy. The second respondent issued a notice, dated 5. 6. 2001, under Section 4 (1) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (Central Act No. 40 of 1971; hereinafter called 'the Act' for brevity), calling upon the petitioner to show-cause as to why he should not be evicted from unauthorized occupation of Railway Land admeasuring 10. 42 X 8. 31 mts (86. 5902 square metres) situated at Dayanand Nagar, Moulali chord line. The petitioner submitted explanation on 21. 7. 2001 stating that the premises owned by him does not fall within the purview of the Act, since it is a patta land, and that the house was constructed after obtaining necessary permission from the Malkajgiri Municipality, for which electricity and tap connection was obtained. The petitioner also alleges that there is a municipal road between Railway track and the petitioner's Colony and that Railways cannot claim any land beyond the municipal road. After considering the explanation, the second respondent passed orders on 19. 12. 2001 under Section 5 (1) of the Act, directing the petitioner to evict the premises within 30 days. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 9 of the Act, being C. M. A. No. 10 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L. B. Nagar, Hyderabad. By common order, dated 2. 12. 2002, the appeal was dismissed. In all other five writ petitions the date of show-cause notice, the date of explanation and the date of eviction order passed by the second respondent are the same and the contention is also the same. Indeed, all the houses are situated in the same Colony and all the petitioners claim that they have purchased the land from B. Madhusudhan Reddy. The orders of the second respondent passed under Section 5 of the Act having been confirmed by the appellate authority, merged in the order of the appellate authority, assailed in the writ petitions.

(3.) THE Senior Divisional Engineer, Coordination, Hyderabad Division, South Central Railway, Secunderabad, the first respondent herein, filed counter-affidavits in all the writ petitions. A reference to the counter-affidavit in W. P. No. 2962 of 2003 would reveal the following case of the first respondent. In connection with shifting of meter guage goods and transhipment yard from Secunderabad to Moulali and for laying of Malkajgiri-Moulali Chord Line, Central Railway acquired land at Malkajgiri Village from various pattadars in different survey numbers during the year 1962-1963. The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Hyderabad, passed Award on 4. 7. 1967. An extent of Acs. 15. 01 guntas in Survey Nos. 885/1, 914, 915, 919, 920, 10 and 11 belonging to B. Ranga Reddy and an extent of Acs. 04. 38 guntas of land in Survey Nos. 913, 921, 8, 2, 916, 496 and 9 belonging to B. Madhusudhan Reddy, were acquired and handed over to Railways on 26. 12. 1963. The petitioner encroached the Railway Land to an extent of 86. 58 square metres in Survey No. 9. As directed by the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, a joint survey was conducted by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Malkajgiri, along with various Officials. The encroachment as projected by the Railways was checked and confirmed, and after careful examination, the second respondent issued notice under Section 4 of the Act. Even before that a notice was got published in the Deccan Chronicle, Andhra Patrika and Siasat Daily Newspapers, dated 9. 8. 1988, cautioning the public against purchase of Railway Land in Survey Nos. 8, 9, 10, 11, 913, 914 and 916, and that they would be responsible for the costs and consequences. In spite of the same, the petitioners encroached upon the land.