V. PURUSHOTHAM REDDY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners, wherein the following prayer is made:

(2.) Heard the arguments of Sri J.Venudhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Gram Panchayat and Rural Development, appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 5, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 and Sri Naresh Reddy Chinnolla, learned counsel for the respondent No.7 and perused the record.

(3.) The averments of the writ petition as well as the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners reveal that the petitioners are the owners and possessors of the agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos.330, 331, 325 and 324 situated at Kadaparthi Village, Nakrekal Mandal, Nalgonda District. To reach the said agricultural lands, there exists a cart track public road of 30" width since more than 50 years, which is passing through the lands in Survey Nos.330 and 331. The said cart track, though not figured in the village map, being used by the petitioners, farmers and commuters of nearby villages and even bus services also used to ply through the said cart track. The land in Survey No.330 is a patta land, whereas the land in Survey No.331 is a Government land. While so, the unofficial respondent No.7 illegally obtained pattadar pass book in respect of said Government land in Survey No.331 to an extent of Ac.5-14 guntas by managing the revenue officials and started obstructing the said cart track, since past three years. Therefore, on 09.01.2019, petitioner No.1 made a representation before the respondent No.4-Tahsildar, Nakrekal Mandal, requesting to restore the said cart track. The respondent No.4-Tahsildar directed the Revenue Inspector to enquire and submit report. Accordingly, the Revenue Inspector visited the subject cart track, enquired and submitted a report to respondent No.4-Tahsildar on 10.01.2019, wherein it is reported that there exists a cart track in Survey Nos.330 and 331, but the same was not recorded in Village Naksha and that unofficial respondent No.7 constructed a room on the said cart track about an year ago and is constructing a sump since one month and the said construction was stopped. Thereafter, on 17.01.2019, the respondent No.4-Tahsildar issued notice to petitioner No.1 and unofficial respondent No.7, so as to present before him on 24.01.2019 with all the relevant evidence for enquiry. Immediately, on receiving the said notice, the unofficial respondent No.7 filed a suit in O.S.No.1 of 2019 before the Junior Civil Judge, at Nakrekal, Nalgonda District, seeking perpetual injunction against petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and obtained junction order. On 20.08.2019, the respondent No.4-Tahsildar issued a Memo, wherein he clearly observed that there exists a cart track in Survey Nos.330 and 331, but stated that since the lands are patta lands, no action can be taken. On 30.09.2019 and 16.10.2019, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 made representations before the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 requesting them to remove the obstruction on the cart track. Thereafter, on 12.06.2020, panchanama was conducted by the Mandal Revenue Inspector and Village Revenue Officer in the presence of villagers, wherein it was recorded that there exists public cart track since olden days passing through the lands in Survey Nos.330 and 331, but the unofficial respondent No.7 is obstructing the public from using the said cart track by constructing a room and sump therein. On 30.07.2020, when the unofficial respondent No.7 again obstructed the public way, petitioner No.2 filed a complaint before respondent No.6, but the police closed the said complaint as civil in nature on 20.08.2020. Whereas, on the report given by the unofficial respondent No.7, the police registered a case against petitioner Nos.1 and 2. On 01.08.2020, a joint report was submitted by Mandal Revenue Inspector and Village Revenue Officer to respondent No.4-Tahsildar, wherein it was stated that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda, orally instructed to restore the 21 feet wide road through the land in Survey Nos.330 and 331. Thereafter, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 submitted another representation dated 21.08.2020 before the respondent Nos.2 to 5 requesting them to restore the subject cart track, but till date no action has been taken on the said representation. To buttress his argument, learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the common order dated 25.10.2019 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.39226 of 2017 and Contempt Case No.3215 of 2018 and ultimately, prayed to grant the relief as prayed for.