60 yrs on, boundary dispute leaves Rs 3k cr land claim unresolved | Hyderabad News

Done: arunHyderabad: Even as Telangana undertakes an ambitious re-survey of land records across more than 2,200 villages, a six-decade-old boundary dispute between two villages straddling Medchal Malkajgiri and Yadadri Bhuvanagiri districts remains unresolved, leaving ownership claims over nearly 600 acres of land worth an estimated ₹3,000 crore hanging in the balance.At the heart of the dispute are parcels of land located along the boundary of Ankireddypalli village in Keesara mandal of Malkajgiri district and Ramalingampalli village in Yadadri district. While villagers claim large tracts are govt and ceiling land that have been encroached upon, private landowners and a company operating in the area insist the lands are patta properties acquired legally.Telangana high court had directed authorities to conduct a survey and demarcate whether the disputed land falls within Malkajgiri or Yadadri district and determine its nature. However, despite surveys being initiated, the exercise is yet to reach a conclusion.According to villagers, nearly 600 acres are under dispute, including 295 acres in survey No. 918, 20 acres in survey No. 886 and 10 acres in survey No. 887 of Ankireddypalli. Villagers claim these lands include around 324 acres of govt land and another 200 acres classified as ceiling land.Some residents accused Salvo Industries Private Ltd (formerly Salve Explosives and Chemicals Ltd) of occupying govt land by claiming portions fall under neighbouring Ramalingampalli village. The company, however, has denied the allegations and maintained that the disputed parcels are patta lands.“The land dispute has been going on between the two villages for several decades. To resolve the issue, the govt had constituted committees and a formal survey was conducted in Jan 1965 following which boundaries were clearly demarcated and the disputed land was officially allocated to Ankireddypalli in 1966 and the erstwhile Nalgonda district collector confirmed the report and said they had no objection handing over the land to then erstwhile Rangareddy district,” said N Saraswathi, a resident of Ankireddypalli, who has been pursuing the issue.She said that after the Land Ceiling Act came into force, portions of the land were allotted to eligible farmers in 1975, and land revenue was collected from beneficiaries. Villagers further alleged that survey No. 312 of Ramalingampalli, along with several sub-survey numbers, was subsequently created over the same land, giving rise to overlapping claims and alleged encroachments.The dispute continued despite repeated official interventions. Following directions from the high court, a field survey was conducted by the revenue divisional officer in June 2022. However, according to sources, the report was neither finalised nor made public.Govt sources said the regional deputy director of survey and land records had written to the collectors of both districts in June 2022, recommending that recognised traverse data of Keesara village be adopted as the common boundary for the two villages. The official also suggested finalisation of boundaries under sections 90 and 91 of the Telangana Land Revenue Act.Malkajgiri collector M Manu Choudary said he was unaware of the details of the issue and would examine the matter and take steps to resolve it.Meanwhile, Salvo Industries chairperson A Jayaram Reddy said the controversy stemmed from overlapping survey records and not from encroachment. “Ankireddypalli survey Nos. 918, 886, 887 and Ramalingampalli survey No. 312 refer to the same parcel of land. There is an issue of overlapping/re-numbering of the survey boundaries between the two villages,” he said.He maintained that survey No. 312 of Ramalingampalli had been recorded as patta land in revenue records for over five decades and was supported by village maps. According to him, the same land is now reflected under different survey numbers in Ankireddypalli, resulting in the present dispute.“In view of this overlapping issue and the conflicting survey records, the company has approached the high court seeking appropriate relief and clarification,” he said. He said the company had been pursuing the matter with the survey and land records department and the CCLA for an early resolution, but the issue remained pending at the district level.Rejecting allegations of encroachment, he said the dispute was purely related to survey numbering, boundary identification, and overlapping records.“Therefore, any allegation that the company has encroached upon or occupied land unlawfully is incorrect and is subject to the final decision of the court,” Jayaram Reddy said, adding that the company, established in 1995, had obtained all necessary permissions and clearances from authorities.