High Court · 2025

V. Sanieeva Reddy, S/o. Late Sri Raji.Reddy, aged about 65 years, Plot No. 53 B.N. Reddy Colony, Road No '14, HyderaDao ...PET|T|ONER AND 1. Sri A. Ramachandra Reddy Sio Late Sri Venkat Reddv Aqed about 67 vears. R/o. H.No S-s-SO6/r,?ir1.ir rOi H..littriij npartinen-ts, Vittalwadi Road ilimayathnagar, HYderabad-29 , drli. A: P;tlnila h"oovlfrLl sri A tr'4ahendrq Rlddv' Aged,about 40 vears' ' i.l.ii. i)'s.iil, VUrvipriicotonv sout' Latasuda' secunderabad 3 Smt. K. Prathibha n"oov,irili' 5ri nij'sekt.t6" Reddv' Aged about 36 vears' " nYo. eiO SaPhire WaY, SuPerior, USA a k. F,ir;""ln"oav, \hilo]siiii. v:'sr'nuYa'Orran Reddv' Aged about 34 vears' - ii7;.';i0e; Sare Ari, west ills cA-e1307' usA 5. Sri Bheemariun Reddy, Sl" " il'N"". i:iel kiimatnplr village naien'dranagir Mandal, R.R. District. 'siijtit'p Re-ay' ngeo about-37-years' Fl/o' ...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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of CertioraricallingfortherecordSrelatingtoandinconnectionwiththeordersdt.6- 10-2009 passed by the Special Court under A P Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act Hyderabad in lA Nos 212 ol 2OO9 and 381 of 2009 in LGC No' 15 of 2007 as illegal, contrary to law an d facts and quash the same' l.A. NO: 1 0F 2010 (WPM P. NO:64 oF2010) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay - all furthe.proceed ngs of the LGC No. 15 0f 2007 0n the fire ,f Speciar court under.A.P. Land c;rabbing (prohibition) Act Hyderabad pending disposar of the above writ petition and pass l.A. NO: 1 OF 2013 WPMP. NO:27 142 0 F 20131 Petition uncrer section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affiddvit filed in sr.rpport of the petition, the High court may be oreased to direct the writ petitioner nr:t to arienate/create third party rights or arter tre nature of the schedule property rrentioned in LGC No. 15/2007 on the file of Special court under A.P. Land Gabbing (prohibition) Act. counsel for the Petitioner: sRr sRINIVAS DAMMALAPATT, sENroR couNSEL counsel for the Respondents: sRl S.V.RAMANA FoR sRl o.MANOHER REDDy The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.62 oF 20L0 ORDER: (Per Hon'b1e Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili) This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the order' dated 06.10.2009,passed in I.A'Nos'212 and 381 ol20O9 in L'G'C'No'15 of 2007 by the Special Court under A'P' Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Acf Hyderabad'

2. Heard Sri Dammalapati Srinivas' learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri S'V' Ramana' learned counsel representing Sri O. Manohar Reddy' learned counsel for the responden Ls-aP P Iicants.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner had contended that the respond'ents-applicants have filed the subject L.G.C.No.15 of 2007 against the petitioner and respondent No'5' In the said L.G.C', the petitioner has filed I'A'No'212 of 2009 and tespondent No.5 has filed I'A'No'38L of 2009' under Section 8(2A) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act' seeking to t AKS,J & LNA,J \r,/-P.No.62 of 2010 r, dismiss the srrbject L.G.C. as not maintainable. But, the Special Court oide irn;:ugned order, dated 06.10.2009, was pieased to dismiss the saici [.As 4, Learned ll,:nior Counsel appearing for the petil.ioner had further contended that the respondents-applicants fiied the subject L.G.C. in respoct of the land in Survey Nos.96/11 ,nd 96/12 situated at Bandlaguda (Jagir) Village, Rajenclranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddv Distrcit, without disclosing the extent of land owned by them. In the absence of any details, the Special Court could not have adjuclicatt:d the case. The respondents-appli<:ants must initially disclos;e the extent of land owned by them in ,:,lch of the aforesaid Sun,'ey Numbers. Therefore, appropriate ,:rders be passed in the \A'rit Petition by setting aside the impugrLed order, dated 06.10.20119, and dismiss the subject L.G.C. filel by the respondents-appli cants.

5. On the ,cther hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-applicants had contended that the subject L.G.C. was filed way-back irL the year 2007 and by virtue of the interim order, t - *.*'. 3 AKS,J & LNA,J W.P.No.62 of 2010 dated 06.01.2010, passed by this Court in W'P'MP'No'64 of 2010' the proceedings in the subject L'G'C' were stalled' Let the Special Court adjudicate the case on merits and the petitioner would be entitled to make all his defence in the pending L'G'C' Therefore' appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petition' t I

6. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties' is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the interlocutory order passed in the subject L'G'C' Therefore' this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order'

7. We also take note of the fact that the Special Courts under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act were abolished in the State of Telangana and all pending cases were transferred to concerned District Courts. Therefore, the petitioner shall appear before the concerned District Court, where the subject L'G'C' was transferred' and contest the case by taking all the defence pleas' which were available to him. /,/ 1 I l I l I I l i i i l 4 AKS,J & LNA,J W.P.No.62 of20lO 8' with the above observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of. 'fhere shail be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO REGISTRAR fNT ASSIST il, USE"ri ON OFFICER To

1. 9n" CC to []Rl SR|N|VAS_DAI/IVALAPAT|, SENTOR COUNSEL IOpUCt ? 9n" c9 to sRt o TMANoHER REDDV Adv;cate'toput]" 'ivLL tv'| \rvl 3. Two CD Copies PSK. GJP l HIGH COURT DATED:0610112025 ORDER WP.No.62 of 2010 / ,r -lAl€ ) o Bl riir 2[25 rt {- t oEsr , q-C DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ";-t/)