ARE LACHANNA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition (public interest litigation) has been filed by the petitioner, who is an Advocate, stating that for construction of court complex and residential quarters for judicial officers, G.O.Ms.No.118MA dtd. 01/02/2008 was issued allotting Ac.1.33 guntas in Survey No.406 of Mancherial Town. Thereafter, a request was again made for allotment of some additional land and additional land was allotted in 2011. It has been stated that even though funds were sanctioned, no construction was carried out and all of a sudden, in lieu of the land which was allotted earlier, the respondents have allotted Acs.5.00 of land vide order dtd. 06.08.2018 and possession has already been given. It has further been stated that the land, which has now been allotted, is far from city and in respect of the prime land, which was allotted earlier inside the city, it is being stated that it is within the FTL of Ramuni Cheruvu. A prayer has been made in the present public interest litigation for issuance of a direction to the respondents to construct the court complex over the land which was allotted earlier in the years 2008 and 2011.

(2.) A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the District Collector, Macherial District, respondent No.4 in the present writ appeal. It has been stated that the land, admeasuring Ac.42.22 guntas forming part of Survey No.406 of Mancherial Municipality, has been allotted for development of parks. It has been categorically stated that the land, which was earlier allotted for construction of court complex, comes within the FTL of Ramuni Cheruvu. It has been further stated that under Mission Kakatiya, the State Government has framed a policy to rejuvenate all the tanks and a survey has been carried out by the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records. He has submitted a detailed report dtd. 22/12/2017 stating the location sketch, the boundaries fixed by the Irrigation Department, the full tank level of Ramuni Cheruvu in Survey No.406 to an extent of Ac.42.32 guntas and the area earlier allotted, which forms part of FTL. In those circumstances, alternative land has been allotted for construction of court complex.

(3.) In the considered opinion of this court, if the land falls, as per the fresh survey carried out by the Irrigation Department, under the FTL of Ravuni Cheruvu, construction cannot take place and therefore, this court does not find any reason to direct the respondents to permit the construction of court complex at the earlier place.