Hyderabad: Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court issued guidelines to Hyderabad Disaster Response and Assets Monitoring and Protection Agency (HYDRAA), which are to be followed while initiating action against illegal encroachments and unauthorised construction.
Firstly, the title of the encroachers and the persons who made unauthorised constructions shall be perused, if any. Secondly, permissions obtained illegally from various authorities, including GHMC, municipalities and gram panchayats should be gathered.
Thirdly, HYDRAA shall not show any discrimination between owners of small extents of land that is 60 to 100 sq. yards and one acre and above. Fourthly, HYDRAA shall follow the procedure laid down under GO Ms. 99, dated 19.07.2024, establishing HYDRAA.
Fifthly, HYDRAA has to take steps by following due procedure laid down under the GO so as to enable the citizens to repose confidence in the state.
These guidelines were issued in a writ plea filed by Pradeep Reddy Badvelu, alleging that authorities from the irrigation and command area development department, revenue authorities and HYDRAA had interfered with peaceful possession of the farmhouse, situated at Janmada village in Janwada gram panchayat, Shankarpally mandal, Rangareddy district, belonging to the petitioner.
According to the petitioner, his vendor had obtained permission for construction of a farmhouse from the sarpanch of the Janwada gram panchayat. He asserted that the subject property was not in the full tank level (FTL). He relied on the notification of the FTL boundaries and buffer zones of lakes/water bodies in the Hyderabad metropolitan region, dated 20.07.2016, issued by the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA).
It was the case of the petitioner that the officials had visited the subject property and threatened the petitioner stating that the farmhouse had been built in the FTL of Osmansagar, without notice or intimation. The irrigation and revenue authorities promised to return to the farmhouse property along with the officials of HYDRAA to demolish the structure without following the procedure laid down by law.
The Additional Advocate General (AAG) contended that the authorities would follow the procedure laid down under the GO and also relevant Acts and rules while taking action against illegal encroachments and unauthorised constructions.
He contended that the sarpanch had no authority to grant permission to the vendor of the petitioner. It was the panchayat secretary of the village who should have issued the permission.
The AAG assured the court that HYDRAA would consider the preliminary/final notification, if any, issued by the authorities earmarking the subject property under FTL. HYDRAA would also call for the records from the petitioner, including permission obtained by him before taking any action. After hearing both the parties, the court issued guidelines and directed HYDRAA to take steps strictly in accordance with law and procedure laid down under the said G.O. while taking action against the petitioner.
In legal stories column
Fissures over permission for special puja at Uppal temple
Disarray at the Sri Abhayanjaneya Swamy temple at Uppal set for Tuesday’s Prana Prathista programme came up in a writ petition before the Telangana High Court. Santosh Kumar Nanda, the petitioner, claimed to have sought necessary permissions from the commissioner of the endowment department to perform puja in the temple. He argued that a certain portion of the temple was destroyed in an accident and a resolution was passed to reconstruct the same in 2022. The commissioner permitted the petitioner to proceed with the construction of the maha mandapam within nine months. The petitioner submitted that the construction concluded within four months, following which he sought permission for the puja. It was the case of the petitioner that the founder members of the temple trust objected to the conduct of the programme and were allegedly abusing the petitioner. He submitted that based on the oral permission granted by the commissioner, he had finalised the programme and had released its pamphlets. He sought a direction of the court to appoint a festival officer, if need be, to ensure smooth functioning of the programme. Allegedly, no written permission was granted by the commissioner and it was also the grievance of the petitioner that his representation sent earlier this month to the commissioner seeking written permission went unanswered. Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar after hearing both the parties, ordered notices to the founder trustees of the temple and posted the case for further adjudication.
Land acquisition: Follow court orders or appear in person, collector and RDO told
Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court directed the district collector and the revenue divisional officer (RDO) of land acquisition at Kumurambheem, Asifabad district to comply with the earlier orders of the court within a month, failing which the authorities were directed to appear personally before the court. T. Janardhan Rao, the petitioner, approached the court with a contempt plea against the authorities for not complying with the earlier orders of the court. Previously, a writ plea was filed by 27 farmers, who are residents of Hathini village situated in the district, seeking an order against the authorities to comply with an approved and increased amount of compensation for their lands that were acquired for the Palvai Purshottam project. The RDO had passed an award of compensation in 2003 as per the procedure. As the agriculturists felt that the compensation was insufficient, the award was challenged before an appropriate court of law. Those proceedings culminated in an order of the High Court in 2022, thereby increasing the compensation amount to the agriculturists by fixing the market value for the acquired lands at Rs 1 lakh per acre for both wet and dry category lands along with all other statutory benefits. The order was made final as no appeal was allegedly preferred by the authorities. The farmers moved an execution petition before the appropriate court of law to direct the RDO to deposit the decreed amount, which ultimately was not compiled with. Therefore, a writ plea was raised and subsequently allowed by the High Court seeking a direction against the authorities for depositing the amount as per the updated market value within three months from July, 2023. It was the grievance of the petitioner that till date the orders were not complied with. The court took notice of the matter and directed compliance failing which the authorities were to appear before the court and explain the cause of it.
Plea against inspector for seizing products from shop
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the action of the Godavarikhani One Town police inspector in seizing tobacco products from the petitioner’s shop. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Thodupunoori Venu Prasad, owner of a shop selling tobacco products, including pan masala. The petitioner alleged that the respondent seized the tobacco products from the shop without registering any crime and complained that the action was illegal and without any power or authority of law. The petitioner sought a direction from the food inspector for Karimnagar to release the products that have been seized by the inspector. The judge after hearing the petitioner directed the government pleader to get instructions and posted the matter for further adjudication.
