✦ High Court of India · 28 Jan 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 28 Jan 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
28 Jan 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,407 words

Judgment

2. J 4 E State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretarial, Hyderabad The Districi Cbllector, Rangareddy District Office, Office at lntegrated. District Office Complexes, Kon!ara kalan Village, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Rangareddy District. ffre "Revenire District Officer, Shadnagar, Office at Faroocinagar, Lingareddy Guda- Ranoareddv District, Telanqana. The lVanda'i Revenue Officer, Farooqnagar Mandal, Office at Near Shadnagar Road Ranoareddv District, Telanqana. fhe Snaaiaqar lr/unicipal Corp6ration, Rep by its Commissioner, Office at Station Rd, Shadnagar, Telangana - 50S216 ...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 oI 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, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus Declaring the actions of the official Respondents more particularly official Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in interfering with the Possession of the Property/Land of the Petitioner Firm without issuing Notice or prior intimation to the Petitioner herein with respect to Property situated at sy. No. 23lA and 23lAA admeasuring 22,022 Sq. Yrds. (Ac. 4-22 Gts.) or equivalent to 18,413.19 Sq. Mtrs., out of the total land situated at Solipur Village Shivar, Farooq Nagar Mandal, shadnagar Municipality, Rangareddy District, Telangana as lllegal, Arbitrary and in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300A of constitution of lndia and consequently direc:. the Official Respondents more particularly the Official Respondent No. 3 and 4 not to approach and interfere with the pcssession of the Property/Land of the Petitioner situated at Sy. No. 23lA and 23lAA admeasuring 22,022 Sq. Yrs. (Ac. 4-22 Gts.) or equivalent to 18413.19 Sq. I\,ltrs., out of the total land situated al Solipur Village Shivar, Farooq Nagar Ir,4an Jal, Shadnagar Municipality, Rangareddy District, Telangana without following ,Jue process of Law IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition undr:r Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumsl.ances stated in the affidavit filed in :;upport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Official llespondents more particularly Official Responrjent No.3 & 4 not to interfere withr the Possession of the Petitioner with respect k.r Property/Land situated at Sy No. 23lA & 2311A admeasuring 22,022 Sq. Yrs. (A:. 4-22 Gts.) ot equivalent to 184'1 3 19 Sq. [\4trs., out of the total land situated at Solipur Village Shivar, Farooq .Niagar l\,4andal, Shadnagar Il,4unicipality. Rangzrreddy District, Telangana pending rlisposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. ASAD HUSSAIN Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI MAROGANT KRISHNA, SC The Court made the following: ORDER +f ,t :l .!' i"' I I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASI(AR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.233O of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is frled by the petitioner, seeking the following relief: "For the reasons stated in the accompariying affrdavit, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order of Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Declaring the actions of the Official Respondents more particularly Official Respondent Nos. 3 & 4 in interfering with the Possession of the Property/Land of the Petitioner Firm without issuing Notice or prior intimation to tl're Petitioner herein with respect to Property situated at Sy. No. 23lA &, 23/AA adrneasuring 22,022 Sq. Yrds. (Ac. 4-22 Gts) or equivalent to 18,413.19 Sq. Mtrs., out of the total land situated at Solipur Village Shivar, Farooq Nagar Mandal, Shadnagar Municipality, Rangareddy District, Telangana as Illegal, Arbitrary ald in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300,{ of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Oflicial Respondents rnore particularly the Official Respondent No. 3 & 4 not to approach ald interfere with the possession of the Property/Land of the Petitioner situated at Sy. No. %lA e 23/AA adneastrLng 22,022 Sq. Yrs. (Ac. 4-22 Gts.) or equivalent to 18413.19 Sq. Mtrs., out of the total land situated at Solipur Village Shivar, Farooq Nagar Mandal, Shadnagar Municipality, Rangareddy District, Telangana without following 2 CVBR, J W.P.No.2 )30 of 2O25 .-:tr:rj-':-- due process of Law and pass such other order or ordcrs z,s this Honblc Corrt deems ht and proper in the Interest of Justice."

2. It is stated that the petitioner is the oivner and possessor of the lald admeasuring 22,022 squzrre yards (Acs. 4.22 gulltas) in Survey Nos.23/A and 23 lAA, situated at Solipur Villieg,: Shivar, Farooq Nagar Mandal, S hadnagar Municipality, Ranga Reddy District (for short, 'th,:) subject land') having purchased under registered sale cjeed uide Document' No 225 /2023. It is further stated tl-rat after purchasing the subject land, the petitioner has rrade an application seeking layout permission in.respect of tLLe subject land uide Application N o.OO7 62 I I LOl SHAD/ 3 1 52 I 0(106 I 2024 dated 12.07 .2024 and after verifying the necessary documents, the responde'nts have granted layout permission. It rs further stated that in terms of the layout permission, the petitioner a-1so executed a mortgage deed uide Docurnen t No.l6l46 of 2024 dated 30.11.2024 in favour of respondent No.5.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submi tted that even after obtaining all necessar5z permissions i rom the ) CVBR, J W.P.No.233O of 2025 competent authorities, at the instance of the 1oca1 politicians, respondent Nos.3 and 4 are frequently interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner and disputing the nature of the subject land and it's classification or forcing the petitioner not to utilize the subject land'

4. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the respondents have received some complaints on the petitioner, but they are not interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner in any manner. Learned Government Pleader further stated that if the respondents are having any claim over the subject land for which the layout has been approved in favour of the petitioner, they will take appropriate steps strictly in accordance with law' I ,

5. In view of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, as it is stated that the petitioner has purchased the subject land under registered sale deed bearing Document No.225 /2023 and also obtained the layout permission uide \ I 4 CVBR, J W.P.No.2330 of 2O25 } Application No.00762l ILOlSHAD/315210006 l2O2'l dated 19.12.2024, ille ends of justice would be met. if the respondents ar,: directed that if they are having any claim over the subject la.nd, the respondents shall issue noti< e to the petitioner and etfter conducting an enquiry, if it is revealed that any portion of r-he subject lald is Government 1and, then only they shall i.rrr:rfere into the possession of the petitioner. trxcept the above procedure, the respondents shall not interfere into the possession of the subject lan<l of the petltloner ln arly manner

6. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellzrn,:ous applications pending, if any, sh r11 stand c1o sed. //TRUE COPYII SD/. A.V.S.PRASAD ANT REGISTRAR ASSIS x-\ ( I To, ECTION OFFICER 1. The Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat. T.:l.,Hvderabad 2. The Districi Coltector. Rangareddy Dijtri.loffii"lbri"e at tnteJratAd District ' E|,? I"{:u:.31:Y'J,3,r,5:i jlfi3:;g" orrice a t Fa roo ci na srr r Li ns a redd v - off ice Co m p tr-.xr; s. Ko ngari ki tn Vi itA;: i6rril"i r|"tn u, rr,4a r da t, Rangareddv District. ..i Ma nda r, orrice a t N ea r s had na gar A::yfi :l!i [?]f;i tsi.flXll?!,5fi :6,",T's" \ : 9il:.!"u[IlTl?i';J;::iiibl%'iJr4"uniciParcorporation orrice a Station Rd, ? Y.lf 33 J?".:Si i3A%EVP it'i : ,xEX"SAi"JB?yn?r.* * or r,ra nsa n a at g gnu gg t^o sFt rr,taRoenNr KR|SHNA, SC topucl 9. Two CD Copiers Hyderabad IOUTT BM GJP t Y{Yt ----dH--'--fi1.r7..=.--'.= - \c-/---- -'*--- -*t1:'' : - e3,::... -g1^HC HIGH GOURT DATED:2810112025 -- '-:-:-i:::- .,t Ci. 0 | APfi 2025 (. I C ti .< O t [) sp.rJcH cO * ORDER WP.No.2330 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS It

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