HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court, on Wednesday, denied a request for interim relief or a stay on the large-scale demolition and rehabilitation efforts at Bhoodan lands in Velugumatla village, Khammam district. The court noted that intervening now might negatively impact many eligible beneficiaries in need.
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy issued this ruling while considering petitions from families displaced during the demolition drive conducted on February 24. The court instructed the state government to submit a detailed counter-affidavit and set the next hearing for April 15.
During the proceedings, the government pleader for revenue presented written instructions detailing the status of the petitioners. It was reported that many affected individuals had been identified and approved for house site allotments, including support under the Indiramma housing scheme.
However, five petitioners had their applications denied because they already own homes. The status of the remaining petitioners is still being reviewed, as their names did not appear on the demolition list.
The government pleader further informed the court that 311 pattas had been issued to affected individuals, with 101 beneficiaries receiving approval under the Indiramma Indlu program.
The counsel for the petitioners argued that the land in question is classified as Bhoodan land, asserting that only the Bhoodan board secretary has the legal authority to issue pattas for such properties. They also questioned the legality of the current allotments, claiming that pattas issued under the Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, are not valid in this case.
Issues with Patta Issuance
In response, the government pleader acknowledged a clerical mistake in the initial patta issuance, where an incorrect government order was referenced, and confirmed that corrections have been made.
After considering both sides, the court noted that while the petitioners have challenged the allotment process carried out by the revenue department, some have already accepted their allotted plots. The court concluded that halting the process at this point would not serve justice and adjourned the case.
