High Court asks if collector surveyed land sitting in car
Amazed at the 42-page report submitted by the officials within 24 hours of an order for enquiry issued by the Chief Minister of Telangana, the judge said, “When the Chief Secretary has directed the collector to conduct an enquiry, vis-a-vis, when the collector had ordered a tahsildar to conduct survey and inspection? At what time, the tahsildar gave back the report by inspecting the site and conducting a survey? When did it reach the collector? Is it possible within one hour? What Mr Advocate General, in your long service, have you ever seen this swinging response from the state machinery,” Justice Vinod Kumar asked AdvocateGeneral B.S Prasad.
Replying to the questions posed by the Judge, the advocate-general said the allegations were made against the minister. So an immediate report was asked.”
The Advocate-General, however, said that it was a preliminary report and a summary report will be prepared by following the due process of law. Mr Prasad said there was no embargo in law or the Revenue Act, which restricts the collector or revenue officials of designated rank to enter into agriculture lands owned by individuals or the government to inspect.
Reacting sharply to the contentions of the A-G, the judge questioned as to which law empowers the collector or his officials to go directly into private properties to conduct inspections and to erect boards stating that the land belongs to the government, without hearing the affected parties.”
“The Constitution ensures every citizen has something called freedom or fundamental rights, they cannot be breached by authorities. If so, how can it be tolerated,” Judge said.
While reading the report of the district collector, which says that a detailed and full survey has been conducted, the Judge wondered as to how could the District Collector conduct a detailed survey of 120-odd acres of land in a single day. “Even if it is a digital survey, a person has to go for the survey by holding a digital compass on the land,” the Judge asked.
Explaining that the experience of conducting a physical survey of 18 acres of land owned by him, the Judge said, “the report of the District Collector indicates that he might have conducted the survey by sitting in his car and going around the land and prepared an enquiry report in sitting in his room.”
Mr D. Prakash Reddy, senior counsel appearing for Jamuna Hatcheries, opposed the contention of the A-G, who informed the court that the report of the district collector is preliminary in nature. The senior counsel insisted that no law permits an official to hold a preliminary enquiry, without putting the petitioner on notice.
After lengthy arguments and considering oral undertaking by the AdvocateGeneral that the officials would proceed further by following due process of law, the court directed the district collector, Medak, to follow the procedure of relevant laws on the complaints received against the lands pertaining to Jamuna Hatcheries in Hakimpet and Masaipet villages of Medak district.
The court has further directed the Director-General of Police, Director-General, Vigilance and Enforcement, ACB and Medak Superintendent of Police against taking any coercive steps against the petitioners.
The court also issued notices to the Chief Secretary, Medak District Collector, Toopran RDO, Masaipet mandal revenue officer directing them to file their responses to the contentions raised by Jamuna Hatcheries within four weeks and adjourned the hearing to July 6.