THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15311 of 2004 ORDER: Petitioners, 5 in number, who are claiming to be the residents of Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, filed this writ petition seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in assigning kunta lands covered by Survey Nos.151 to 153 situated at Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, in favour of the third respondent - Krishna Ghousala of Narsingi Village, as illegal and arbitrary. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioners have agricultural lands in Narsingi Village and they are agriculturists. It is stated that though the lands covered by Survey Nos.151 to 153 are shikam lands, known as Chinna Kunta and Pedda Kunta, they were illegally assigned in favour of the third respondent. Precisely, it is the grievance of the petitioners that as the lands in question are referred to as tank-bed, no assignments of the same should be made to third parties. The second respondent – Tahsildar, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, has filed a counter-affidavit. In the said counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations made by the petitioners, it is stated that the lands admeasuring Acs.4.15 guntas and Acs.5.29 guntas covered by Survey Nos.151 and 152 are Government Gairan lands as per khasra pahani for 1954-55 and they are the tank-bed lands of Chinna Kunta. It is further stated that the land in Survey No.153 is in the name of Goseva Mandal as per khasra pahani for 1954-55. It is further stated that when there was an application by the third respondent for allotment of lands admeasuring Acs.4.15 guntas; Acs.5.29 guntas and Acs.5.00 guntas covered by Survey Nos.151, 152 and 174 respectively, it was given possession of the same pending alienation proceedings in its favour. It is further stated that as the Government has rejected the proposals for alienation, possession of the said lands was taken back. It is also stated that so far as lands covered by Survey Nos.151 and 152 are concerned, no assignment was made in favour of the third respondent. The third respondent also filed a separate counter-affidavit. In the said counter-affidavit, while denying the allegations of the petitioners, it is stated that the land covered by Survey No.153 of Narsingi Village was allotted to the third respondent way back in 1950 and the same was also recorded in the revenue records and pattadar passbook was issued. So far as lands covered by Survey Nos.151 and 152 are concerned, it is stated that they are dry lands and tanks, which were abandoned 50 years back as such when the third respondent applied for, possession of the same were given to it by conducting a panchanama on 04.11.1980, as such, it is in possession. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1, 2 and 4 and Sri M.Papa Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent. In this case, it is to be noticed that although it is the case of the petitioners that the third respondent was illegally assigned lands covered by Survey Nos.151 to 153, there is no assignment with regard to lands covered by Survey Nos.151 and 152. While it is true that possession of the lands covered by Survey Nos.151 and 152 was given to the third respondent pending alienation proceedings, from the counter-affidavit filed by the second respondent, it is clear that such alienation/allotment proposals were rejected by the Government and aforesaid lands were taken back from the possession of the third respondent. It is not known how possession could be given even before allotment/alienation proposals were pending consideration. Be that as it may, as of now, it is stated that on rejection of alienation/allotment proposals, possession was already taken back and such lands are in the Government custody as on today. With regard to the land covered by Survey No.153, it is to be noticed that it was assigned in 1950. Even from the counter-affidavits filed by the second and third respondents, it is evident that the name of the third respondent was recorded as pattadar in the khasra pahani of 1954-55. When such assignment was made as early as in 1950, there is no reason for the petitioners to keep quiet, for such a long time, for about more than five decades and to file this writ petition in 2004 questioning such assignment on the ground that it is a tank-bed land. It is also to be noticed the land covered by Survey No.153, is not a shikam land and it was assigned in favour of the third respondent, prior to 1954-55. In that view of the matter, I do not find any illegality in the assignment of land covered by Survey No.153 and there are no reasons on the part of the petitioners to explain the abnormal delay and laches in questioning the assignment made in 1950, for such a long time. The lands in Survey Nos.151 and 152 are concerned, allotment was made initially and later, possession was taken back in view of rejection of alienation proposals by the Government. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this writ petition for issuance of directions as prayed for. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 17th FEBRUARY, 2011. kvni