✦ High Court of India · 14 Feb 2025

1. SARDAR SARDOOL SINGH v. 1. The State of Telangana

Case Details High Court of India · 14 Feb 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
14 Feb 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,196 words

12. The Executive Officer, Sri Sikh Gurudwara Saheb, Sikh Chawni, Nalebagh, Uppuguda, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS = Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of wiit of mandamus declaring the action of the 5th respondent in acldressing letter vide RC.NO.F/1381/2015 dated 18-12-2017 to the grh responctent seeking police protection for demolition of lhe petitioners house properties in T.S.NO.3, Ward No.273, Block no.F, Sikh Chawni, Uppuguda, Kandikat \/illage, Bandlaguda mandal, Hyderabad without following due process of law and threatenirig to dispossession of the petitioners from the petitioners property as illegal, arbitr-ary, unjust and also against the Article 19,21 and 3oo A of constitution of india and set aside the same including all consequential proceedings and consequenfly direct the iespondents not to take any coercive steps for dem6lition and disposseision of the petitioners from the petitioners house properties in T.S.l.lO.3, Ward No_273, Block No.F, Sikh Chawni, Uppuguda, Kandikal Village, Bandlaguda trdandal, Hyderabad, including all consequential proceedings forthwith lA NO: 2 OF 2018 Petition under Section 15'1 cpc praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the letter vide R.c. No. F/1381/201 s dated 18.12.2012 issued by the 5th respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may rle pleased to direct the respondents not to take any coercive sleps for demolition and dispossession of the petitioners for the petitioners house properties in T.S. No. 3, Ward No. 273, Block No, Kandikal virrage,. Bandraguda Mandar, Hyderabad forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such oiher order or orders as thii Hon'ble court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstanc,ls of the case. _F Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. J VIJAY KUMAR GOUD Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1,3,4&5: Gp FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2,6,7&.12: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.8,9,10&1 I : Gp FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER 7 wP_6_2014 N8K, J THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO,6 Of 201.8 ORDER: The petitioners claim they are in possession of 100 square yards each with house properties thereon, in T.S.No.3, Ward No.273, Block No.R Sikh Chawni, Uppuguda, Kandikal Village, Bandlaguda Mandal, Hyderabad. A contrary claim was put forth by the Endowments Department stating that Ac.8-03 guntas has been shown in the Book of Endowments vide Muthakab No.1223 of 1350 Fasli as belonging to Sri Sikh Gurudwara Charitable Institution. Alleging interference by the respondent-authorities with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of subject properties, the petitioners filed this writ petition.

2. This Court, while admitting the writ petition on 04.01.2018, passed interim orders in WPMP No.1 of 2018, the relevant portion of which reads as follows: "Recording the submission, there shall be a direction to both the parties to maintain absolute status quo as regards 100 sq. yards each of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 with respective house properties in T.S.No.3, Ward No.273, Block No.F, Sikh Chawni, Uppuguda, Kandikal Village, Bandlaguda Mandal, Hyderbad, until further order.s This order shall not preclude the institution from taking possession of the institution land excluding the properties of the petitioners for which status quo orders are granted today. lt is also made clear that respondent Nos.3, 4, and 5 are also at liberty to proceed against the subject properties, if they so desire in accordance with the procedure established by law." \t\ wp_6 2016 N8K, J

3. When the matter was listed on 30.07.2021;, there was no representation for the petitioners; therefore, the matter was directed to be posted for 13.02.2025 under.,For Dismissal,,caption. 4. Today, when the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners in spite o[ the matter coming up under ,.For Dismissal" caption. It appears that the petitioners are not interested in pursuing the writ petition. It is however to be noted that in view of the interim orders dated O4.Ol.2llggranting liberfy to respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5 to proceed against the subject properties in accordance with the procedure established by raw, this court is ofthe view that the grievance stands redressed and no.further orders are required in the writ petition. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. No costs. Miscelraneous petitions pending, ifany, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY SD/. K. SREE RAMA MURTHY D PUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER 1 Principal Secretary to Endowments Depart Hyderabad. Telangana State. t, Secrelariat Building,

2. The District Cottector, Hyderabad District, Nampally Static,n Road, Hyderabad.

3. The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Boggulakunta, Hyderabad. 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Bo,;gulakunta, Hyderabad.

5. The Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Eoggulakunta, Hyderabad.

6. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad Division, Ganrihi Bhavan Road, M J Market, Hyderabad.

7. The Tahasildar, bandlaguda Mandal, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad. 8. The Commissioner of police, Hyderabad, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 9. The Deputy Commissioner of police, South Zone, Charmirrar, Hyderabad. 10.The Assistant Commissioner of police, Faluknuma, Hyderabad. 11. The Station House Officer, Chatrinaka police Station, Hydr:rabad. 12. TIhe Executive Officer. Sri Sikh Gurudwara Saheb, Sikh Chawni, Nalebagh, Uppuguda, Hyderabad.

13. One CC to SRt. J VtJAy KUMAR GOUD Advocate tOpUCl _ _ .C o^tJ a

14.Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

15. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

16.Two CCs to GP for ENDOWMENTS, High Court for the State of Telangana / at Hyderabad. [OUT]

17.Two CD Copies KKS P}\qI JS T] HIGH COURT DATED:1410212025 \ \ ORDER WP.No.6 of 2018 t t ,21;. -I lt E: S 14 J !) ('\(' j. (: ): 4t 19 JUN Zlffi { 1), * sp, i -, lt,tr :=: . =--':t' CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 8"\q )-\\s.l)-f

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments