Telangana High Court
Athkuri Vijay vs The State Of Telangana on 9 April, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION NO.14988 OF 2024
ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the
respondents to consider his representations/complaints dt.08.01.2024,
19.04.2024 and 20.04.2024 and to remove the encroachments made by
the 5th respondent on the common public road/ Bandi Daari (cart track)
leading from Esojipet Village to Minpur Village via Koduru Village
passing through Survey Nos.213, 214, 254, 260, 262, 259, 299, 300,
301, 306, 312, 313, 316 and 317 of Koduru Village, Pulkal Mandal,
Sangareddy District and to restore the common public road in
accordance with law and to pass such other order or orders.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are
that the petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and peaceful
possessor of the land to an extent of Ac.2.24 guntas in Survey No.214
situated at Koduru Village, Pulkal Mandal, Sangareddy District, having
inherited the same and the name of the petitioner is also recorded in the
revenue records and he has been issued TD-cum-e.passbook. It is
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
2
submitted that the subject property is situated by the side of the common
public road/ Bandi Daari (cart track) leading from Esojipet Village to
Minpur Village via Koduru Village and the said public road is classified
as Bandi Daari (cart track) in the revenue records/ village maps/ Naksha,
etc., and the width of the Bandi Daari (cart track) is about 8 metres and
the same is being used by the petitioner and his neighbouring land
owners from decades to have access to their lands. It is submitted that
the said track is the only way to reach the petitioner’s land. It is
submitted that the 5th respondent, who is his neighbouring land owner,
encroached the said Bandi Daari (cart track) and thus blocked the right
of way and ingress and egress of the petitioner to the subject property.
Therefore, the petitioner has submitted representations dt.08.01.2024,
19.04.2024 and 20.04.2024 for removal of the encroachments, but no
action has been taken by the official respondents and therefore, the
present Writ Petition has been filed.
3. Respondents 3, 4 and 5 have filed their respective counters along
with relevant documents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Section
58(1) of the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018, all public roads in any
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
3
village, other than National Highways, State Highways and roads
vesting in Zilla Praja Parishad or Mandal Praja Parishad, shall vest in
the Gram Panchayat together with all pavements, stones and other
materials thereof, all works, materials and other things provided
therefor, all sewers, drains, drainage works, tunnels and culverts,
whether made at the cost of the Gram Panchayat fund or otherwise, in
alongside or under such roads, and all works, materials and things
appertaining thereto and the proviso thereunder provides that the Gram
Panchayat shall take steps to remove encroachments on, and prevent un-
authorized use of, any road, other than a National Highway passing
through the Gram Panchayat. The learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that since there is a cart track leading from Esojipet Village to
Minpur Village via Koduru Village passing through various survey
numbers of the Village and adjacent to the lands of the petitioner as well
as the 5th respondent and various other lands of the village, the Gram
Panchayat, i.e., the 4th respondent ought to have taken cognizance of the
complaints of the petitioner and ought to have taken action thereon.
5. He further submitted that Section 92 of the Telangana Panchayat
Raj Act provides for removal of encroachments by the Gram Panchayat.
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
4
As regards the contention of the 4th respondent that the alleged cart track
is not a public road, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed
reliance upon the definition of ‘public road’ under Section 2(34) of the
Telangana Panchayat Raj Act to mean “any street, road, square, Court,
alley, passage and includes the roadway over any public bridge or cause-
way, the footway attached to any such road, public bridge or cause-way,
and the drains attached to any such road, public bridge or cause-way.”
He submitted that ‘cart way’ also falls within the definition of ‘public
road’.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of
this Court to the Telangana Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and Section 2
thereof to submit that all public roads and streets vested in local
authority shall, for the purpose of this Act, be deemed to be the property
of the Government.
7. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to Section 24 of the
Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317-F to submit
that all public roads, lanes, paths, bridges, etc., are the property of the
Government.
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
5
8. The learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submitted that the
cart track leading from Esojipet Village to Minpur Village via Koduru
Village is shown in the village map and therefore, it is a public road and
public officials are required to see that there are no encroachments on
the said road. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance
upon the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court (as it then was) in
the case of Koganti Venkata Suryanarayana Vs. The State of A.P.
rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban
Development Department and others in support of his contention that
public roads are to be safeguarded by the authorities.
9. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue has referred to the
averments made by the 3rd respondent in his counter affidavit to submit
that there existed a Bandi Daari (cart track) leading from Esojipet
Village to Minpur Village via Koduru Village and the same is passing
through Survey Nos.212, 213, 214, 254, 260, 316, 315, 313, 312 and
306 and the same was being used by the farmers and neighbouring land
owners to have access to their lands and for taking carts for agricultural
operations. It is submitted that the 5th respondent and other land owners
have blocked the cart track and it is completely under cultivation. It is
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
6
further submitted that action is being taken to remove the encroachments
from the cart track after harvesting the paddy crops which existed in the
above survey number lands. Enclosed to the counter affidavit is the
letter addressed by the Mandal Surveyor to the Tahsildar, Pulkal
Mandal, wherein it is confirmed that on field verification with the
village map, it is found that there is a Bandla Bata (cart track) passing
through Survey Nos.212, 213, 214, 254, 260, 315, 312, 313, 316, 306,
but not passing through Survey Nos.299, 262 and 307 and that the
Bandla Bata has been encroached and it is completely under cultivation.
The learned Government Pleader for Revenue therefore submits that
necessary action has to be taken by the authorities for removal of the
encroachments on the cart track.
10. Learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat, i.e., the 4th
respondent has submitted that the alleged cart track leading from
Esojipet Village to Minpur Village via Koduru Village is not in
existence for the past 40 years and further that the Panchayat Secretary
is not the competent authority for the encroachments in the fields. It is
further submitted that there is a title dispute between the petitioner
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
7
herein and the unofficial respondent, i.e., the 5th respondent which is the
genesis for this Writ Petition.
11. The 5th respondent has also filed a counter affidavit stating that
the alleged Bandi Daari which is about 8 metres width is not in public
use for the last 40 years in view of laying of public road adjacent to the
land of the neigbour of the petitioner and Survey No.262, i.e., the road
leading from Taddanpally to Singur. A copy of the Google map is also
filed to demonstrate the same. Thus, according to him, there is no public
road and therefore, Section 58(1) of the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act is
not applicable in this case. Along with the memo dt.06.01.2025, Google
maps of relevant area are also filed by the 5th respondent.
12. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record,
this Court finds that admittedly, there was a cart track leading from
Esojipet Village to Minpur Village via Koduru Village and the same is
reflected in the village map. The 3rd respondent has also confirmed the
same and it is also an admitted fact that the petitioner is having land in
Survey No.214 of Koduru Village and the said cart track was passing
alongside the same. It is also an admitted fact that the said cart track is
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
8
not in existence now due to encroachments by the neighbouring land
owners.
13. Whether ‘cart track’ can be called as a ‘public road’ is an issue
which needs consideration. Under Section 24 of the Andhra Pradesh
(Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317-F, all public roads, lanes,
paths, bridges, ditches, dikes, rivers, streams, tanks, ponds, canals, lakes,
flowing water and all lands, wherever situated, together with all rights
appertaining thereto are the property of the Government except those
belonging to persons or class legally capable of holding property and to
the extent so far as their such rights are established and those in respect
of which any other order under any law may have been given. The word
‘paths’ though has not been defined under the Act, its dictionary
meaning is ‘a way or track laid down for walking or made by continual
treading.’ Therefore, any path which has been laid down either for walk
or for treading of animals, i.e., for carts is also a path and is the property
of the Government. In the Rules under Section 26 of the Andhra
Pradesh Boundaries Act, 1923 laying down the principles in the field
survey demarcation of foot-paths and cart tracks, it is provided that
where a cart track is indicated in any old document or record, the
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
9
maximum extent of 10 feet width (3.04 metres) shall be indicated as a
cart track in the survey record and a distinct indication should be made
between a foot-path and cart track. If the cart track passes entirely
through the field of a single owner that owner has to leave the entire cart
track of 10 feet width (3.04 metres). In case it passes between the fields
of two different owners, each owner has to leave 5 feet width (1.5
metres) for purpose of cart track. This itself indicates that the foot-paths
and cart tracks are also recognized as paths for the purpose of public
roads and therefore, it is the bounden duty of the concerned authorities
to safeguard the same and remove the encroachments of such paths. The
4th respondent may not be the authority to protect or remove the
encroachments on cart tracks as the agricultural land would not come
within the jurisdiction of the 4th respondent. The 2nd and 3rd respondents
being revenue authorities are the custodians of all public roads. When
the petitioner and other villagers have given representations to the 2nd
and 3rd respondents against the encroachment of the subject cart track by
the 5th respondent and others, they ought to have taken action against the
same. However, as per the undertaking given by the 3rd respondent in his
counter affidavit filed in the present Writ Petition that the
encroachments would be removed after harvesting of paddy crops, this
W.P.No.14988 of 2024
10
Court direct respondents 2 and 3 to take immediate action accordingly
and remove the encroachments and re-establish the subject cart track in
accordance with the rules under Section 26 of Andhra Pradesh
Boundaries Act, 1923.
14. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to
costs.
15. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall
stand closed.
___________________________
JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
Date: 09.04.2025
Svv