The High Court · 2025

The State of Telangqra, Rep. by its principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildinq, Secr6tariat. Hvdeiabad The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. The Revenue Divisional -Officer,' District. The Tahsildar, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranqa Reddv District. The Mandal Surv^eyor lbrahimpatnam MandZI, Rang-a Reddy Diskict. 11o.r.".]"!gr'.r1, S/o.K Yadaiah, Agfed about 49 years, Oc6. Agricutture, R/o H No 1-86, Adib-atla Village, lbrahimpatnam Mandll, Ranga Redfy Districi. Kore Mallesh, S/o K.Yadaiah, Aged about 65 years, dcc. Agriculture, Rio H No 3-73, Adibatla Village, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Red-dy Diskict llqtS pqtqpSq, Sio K Ya-daiah, ageid about 57 years, dcc. Agricutture, R/o lJ No t,--AQ, Adibatla Village, lbrahimpatnam Manc!'al, Ranga Redly Distriit. Kore Ailaiah, S/o K.Yadaiah, Aged about 54 years, dcc. Agriculture, R/o ! No { 119, Adibatla Village, tbrahimpatnam Mandat, Ranga Retdy District QqrJa Jglqla. Wo Parla Srinivas Ag6d about 40 years, O-cc. Hou6ehotd, R/o H.No.16-9494, CIB Quarters, Otd Malakpet, Hyderabad. Aakanti .\eglrjg, ..W{o_ fqlantl Prakash, Aged about 38 years, Occ. Household, R/o H.No.16-9-494, CtB euarters, OId Malakpet, Hyderabab. pa.1r9d!y.^Su-d.hardhan Reddy, S/o Satti Reddy, aged about-44 years, R/o H.No.1-58/2, Almasguda, Balapur. Ranga Reddi DisIrict. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of [t/andamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 in non-considering the representation of the petitioner and trying to conduct the survey and demarcation on the land of the petitioner in respect of the land in Sy.No,207 to an extent of 2 24 gts situated at Adibafla \ llage, lbrahimpatnam lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District, which involved in o.s.No t ).4 of 2021 on the file of the Junior civil Judge court, lbrahimpatnam without iss ring any notice to the petitioner and without issuing the notice to all pattadars r sy No.207, is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, unjust and in violation o principles of Natural Justrce and also in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g), ,1 and 300_4 of the Constitution of lndra and consequently direct the resp<,r dent No.4 and 5 to consider the representation of the petitioner, Rot to cor iuct the survey and demarcation on the land of the petitioner in respect of thr: land in Sy.No.207 to an extent of 2.24 gts situated at Adibatla vilage, rbrahimpz :nam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, which involved in o.s.No 524 of 2021 or he file of the Junior civil Judge court, lbrahimpatnam without issuing any notrc€ to the petitioner and without issuing the notice to all pattadars in Sy. No.207 lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 15 j CpC praying that in the in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou direct the respondent No,4 and 5 to consider the representr not to conduct the survey and demarcation on the lan<l respect of the land in Sy. No.207 to an extent o,t 2.24 gl:; Village, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District O S No 524 of 2021 on the .file of the Junior Civit Judge {) without issuing any notice to the petitloner and without rssL pattadars in Sy.No.207 pending disposal of the writ petition ircumstances stated t may be pleased to ion of the petitioner, of the petitioner in situated at Adibatla whrch involved in )urt, lbrahimpatnam ng the notice to all counsel for the Petitioner: sRt. DTNESH REDDY REp sRt Rr poLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. ito5: SRI RAKESH KUMI\ I , AGP FOR REVE NUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos,7to9: SRI S. VENKAT RAf ,ANA lgunset for the Respondent No.iz: SRI Ms.VANISRI REp I) t.CHAL SRINIVASA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 6,10&1 1 :_ The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V'VENUGOPAL W'RIT PETITIO N No.11O9 of 2022 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of !h' ConStitution of India, is liled seeking t}re follo''r,ing relief: "...1o isstze an appropiate wit' order or dire-ctton more partiatlarlg one in the nature of Wnt of Mandamus i.doAng the action of the respond'ent Nos 4 and 5 in non- consideing the' representation of ttrc pet[tioner and trying to conduct the suruell ond demarcatiort on the tond of the "U.rrrro,n", in respect of the lancl in Su No 207 to on e-xtetTt - gt' sitrtated ut Adibatlo Village' i]"'i.".2.2+ -ibrohimpatnom Mandal, Ranga Rec)cly Distict uhich inuolued in o.S-No 524 of 2021 on the file of the 'lunior 'rr,il ,urln" Court lbrahirnpatnarn rttithout issuing ang notice to the petttioner and rtitltout issrring the notice to -poXoaorc in Sg'No 207 is hightg tllegal arbitrary unconstitutiortal unjust ancl in uiolatiott of Pinciptes of i olurot Justice and also in uiolation of Artictes 14' 19 (1) and 30OA of the- Cotlstittttion of India ond 6,';, 'io,n""qr.ntLg direct the respontlent Nos'4 and 5 to corsid"r the representation of tlrc petitiorter Rot to conduct the stLrueg and- d'emarcatiorl on the land of the in ,"tp"'t of the land tt Sv'No 207 to ctn extent ;;i;", d Acs.2.24 gts sttuated ot Adibatla Villaqe' tLrrni*potno^ Manr)ctl, Ranga Redt|11 Distict uthich inuolued in O-S'No 524 of 202 1 on tte ftle of the Junior Ciuit Judge Court lbrahimpattrarn tt'itltotlt tssutng arLA rLotice to the petittoner anrl tuithout i'ssuing the n otice to all pattadars in Sy'No'2O7 and pass '" l'aqc Z ol 4

2. The brief facts of the case are that the retitioner herein is the pattadar of an agricultural land I ) ax extent of Acs.2.24 gurltas in Sy.No.207, situated at \dibatla village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy Distri :t. The revenue authorities have also mutated his namc n the rcvenuc records and issued pattadar passbook anrl lrom ther-r, thc petitioner is in peaccful possession of the ; rbject propcrty. The petitioner ald responder-rt Nos.6 to I I r ll are ag:rnants lcgal hcirs of Sri Kore Yadaiah (lr,: itioner's great grandfather), who in turn acquired the agr i :ultural larnd to an extent of Acs.3.05 guntas ir-r Sy.No.2() and Acs.2.35 guntas in Sy.No.207/ 1. After the dem:s : of his grcat grancifather, the petitioner and respondent . Ios.6 to ll has remained as legal heirs, thev arc all entitle l to get sharc in tl-re szrid land, but respondent Nos.6 to 11 I i tched a plan to avoid the petitioner's share, have colludecl , ith respondent No.12 and sold the joint property to ro; ,ondent No.12. Upor-r such information, the petitioner i cproached tl-rc learned J unior Civil Judge Court, Ibrahimper t ram and lilcd ar Suit lor partition uide O.S.No.524 of 2O2l art I the same rvas 1 \ / / t / Page 3 of4 pending for adjudication' During the pendency of the said suit, respondent No.12 approached respondent Nos'4 and 5 and got mutated his name as pattadar. Respondent Nos 4 and 5 are trying to conduct the survey and demarcation u,'ithout issuing any notice to all the pattadars in Sy.No.2O7' Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. Heard Sri Dinesh Reddy, learned counscl representing Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel lor the petitioner ald learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and peruscrl the record

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the consistent efforts made to obtain necessary instructions from the petitioner have gone in vain. Hence, seeks to adjudicate the matter on merlts

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue u'ould submit that the rvrit petition filed by the petitioner is misconceived, as there are alternative \ \ .- \*='1 forums availablc for redre ssal of the petitior r r's grievance He further submits that the petitioner has a; rroachecl this Court at a premature stage. Therefore, he see<; dismissal of the Writ Pctition

6. Having regard to the submissions madc bv both the learnecl corrnsel, this Court without going irr o the merits and demerits of the case is of the opinion that incc the trial Court has already initiated proceedings in (.S.No.524 of 2O2l and thc petitioner has got every opportur j v to scek the rclief as sough t for before this Court in the tria I lourt. Under these circumstances, the Writ Petition is devoi: of merit and IS accordinglv dismissed. There sha1l be nc rrders as to As a sccluel, miscellaneous petitions, il : ny, pending, shall stand cl ismissed I; ),.L, VIJAYA LAXMI- ASS STANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, Hvderabad [OUT] 1 One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR' Aqvocgle IOPU: I 2 Two CCs to Gp FOR RE"V"E'NitiE ,H,gh C;rrt i"ithe S;t ite of Telangana at : iii,i,-cCi" SRi b vENKATA RAMANA, Advocate.ro : JCI 4 one cc to G DR cHXiLA bCi'r'irVAsn REDDY ' 5. Two CD CoPies pr voiate [oPUC] BM BS HIGH COURT DATED:2610812025 ORDER WP.No.1109 of 2022 STAr€ : 1 ,+ * [ 3 ilB 20?6 G)\ * PAT DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITTON WITIIOUT COSTS @r'l'$ %'