NTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE v. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION NO

direct the respondents not to interfere with construction activity of the petitioner over house property bearing municipal no.10-2-299/1 115 and 10-2-2991113 (corresponding to its portion of old house no.10-2-29911-1 on part of plot no. l6)., admeasuring 203.26 sq. yards, situated at Hanuman Bowli, Mallepally, Hyderabad, which is carrying out strictly in accordance with sanctioned plan vide permit no.3/C1211272012019 daled.21lO8l2019 issued by the office of GHMC, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the writ petition i lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Between: Secretariat. Hyderabad.

1. State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, 2. The District Collector, Hyderabad District. - 3. The Tahsildar, Asifnagai Mandal, Hyderabad O,.r.l1FEr,r,o*rRs/RESpoNDENrs AND Kourtvale Mohammed Ayub, S/o.K.Mohd. Haneef aged about 55 years. occ Business R/o H No 1e-3-543t125, AliNagar, .i]f,EltsB$rFJ$B'#;$"._ Pet,tion under Seclion 1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed rn support of the petition, the Higll Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dl. 2010212020 passed in lA-No.1 of 2020 in WP.No 30'18 of 2020 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRI Counsel for Respondents: SRI RAKESH KUMAR, AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER I I ( THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.3O18 OF 2O2O ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief/s:- ".-. to issue a writ, order or direction more particutarly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus dectraring the action ofthe respondents in interfe.ing with construction activity of the petitioner over house prope.ty bearing municipal oo.lO-2-2991H/5 & |O-2-2991H/B (correspooding to its portion of old house no.lO-2-299/H on part of ptrot no.l6), admeasuring 203.26 sq. yards, situated at Hanuman Bowli, Mallepally, Hyderabad which is carrying out strictly in accordarrce with sanction plarl vide permit no.3/C12/ 1272012019 dated:21.O8.2O19 issued by the office of GHMC, Hyderabad, that too without fotlowing due procedure contemplated under law, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional, vioLation of principbs of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14, L9, 2L & 3OO-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the construction activiqr over subject property, without louocring the procedure contemplated under law, to pass such other order or orders ..."

2. Heard Mr.Mohd. Moin Ahmed Quadri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Rakesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing learned Government Pleader for Revenue appea-ring for respondents.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the lasful owner a-nd Ircssessor of house property bearing municipal l,los. 1O-2-299 lH/5 e LO-2-299 lHlB (corresponding to its portion of old house No.lO-2-299/H on part of plot no.16), admeasuring 203.26 sq. yards, situated at Hanuman Bo'*4i, Mallepally, Hyderabad by virtue of registered sale deed 2 bearing document No.2920/2OI9 dated 03.05.2019 and since then, he is in the possession and enjoyment of the same without there being any intermption from any corner; originally, Mahmood Ali Mirza and others were pattadars and possessors of Acs. 7.00 gts of land situated at Mallepally, Hyderabad who in turn, sold it in favour of one M.Narasimloo through registered sale deed No.14/1958 dated 28.01.1958. Later, the said Narasimloo obtained layout permission from the then Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, vide permit No.126la681 163 dated 09.11.1965 and sold plot Nos.16 and 21 in favour of one Rashid Ahmed through registered sale deed document No.1684/1966 dated l2:O7.1966, who in turn gifted the same in lavour of one Mohd. Basheer Ahmed by way of orai gift deed dated Ol .OZ .1972, who in turn executed a registered Gift Settlement Deed Nos.445 & 446/2OO2 dated

18.O2.2OO2 in favour of his wife namely Smt. Sajida Begum, who in turn got assessments in her name in respect of both plots, vide house No.lO-2-299/H; that thereafter, she had obtained building permission vide permit No. l80/1992 and constmcted rooms thereon and were allotted new municipal Nos.lo-2-2eelH/2. ro-2-299/H/3, tO-2-2991H14, ro-2- (l 3 t- 299 /H/5, 10-2-299 /H/A &, 10-2-299 IH/B, out of which, she sold the subject property in favour of petitioner herein through registered sale deed document bearing No.2920 of 2019 dated 03.05.2019; that later, the petitioner constructed ground and first floor vide.permit No.3/Cl2/l272ol2ol9 dated 2 l.O8.2O 19 ald thus, the petiti,oner is in possession and enjoyment of the subject land. While so, the Officials of respondent No.3, came to the subject property of the petitioner and directed him to stop the construction activity, without issuing any notice, which is abuserof process of iaw. Aggrieved b,y the same, the petitioner preferred the present Writ Petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of respondent No.3 in interfering w'ith the construction activity of the petitioner, without issuing any notice is illegaJ, arbitrarv and abuse of process of :Iaw. Therefore, the petitioner is constrained to file this Writ Petition and seeks the indulgence of this Court.

5. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, by filing the vacate stay application vide I.A.No.1 of 4 2021 contends that the subject land has been identified in T.S.No.28, Block-R, Ward-34 of Mallepally Village, Asifnagar Tahsil, Hyderabad District; that as per TSL Records T.S.No.28 is recorded in Col.No.(lO) as "ABADI" and the total extent is shown in Col.No.(l7) as (59 l) sq. mts. and in Col.No.(2O) recorded as "G-NON ISF LAND"; that as per the TSLR records, the land is classihed as Government Land and that the State Government is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land; that the petitioner has no right or title over ttre subject lands and the alleged Registered Sale deeds purported to have been executed by the petitioner are null and void.

6. He further contends that the Chief Secretary to the Government of Hyderabad issued orders vide Lr.No.1118 dated 21.03.1951 directing the Collector, Hyderabad to take I I over the possession of Ex-Nizam Army lands which are vacant on ground and further directed the Public Works Department to take over the buildings. Therefore, he states that the lands situated at Mallepally Village (Ex-Jagir Village) were under the control of Government since. 195 I and were recorded as Non-ISF (Non Indian State Forces) Government lands in the Revenue and Town Survev Records. Therefore, he states that a 5 the petitioner, by concealing the aforesaid facts, had mislead this Court and frled the present Writ Petition. Stating thus, he seeks to dismiss the Writ Petition.

7. This Court vide order dated 2O.02.2020 directed the respondents not to interfere wittr the construction activity of the petitioner over the house property bearing municipal Nos.1O-2-299 lHlS e lO-2-299 lHlB (c.orresponding to its portion of old house No.lO-2-299/H on part of plot no. 16), admeasuring 203.26 sq. yards, situated at Hanuman Bowli, Mallepally, Hyderabad of the petitioner. However, if at all there was any deviation in construction or violation of any law, it was left open for the competent authority to take action against the petitioner by following due process of law. , I

8. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned I counsel and on perusal of the material available on record, this Court without making any observation on the possession of the petitioner, is of the opinion that if at all the respondents arc contemplating to take action against the petitioner with regard to the subject property, they shall 6 strictly follow the procedure contemplated under law. No I costs.

9. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. \ To //TRUE COPY// Sd/. AHMED ABDULLA KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTIdN OFFICER 1 . The District Collector, Hyderabad District. 2. The Tahsildar, Asifnagar Mandal, Hyderabad District. 3. One CC to SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRI, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

5. Two CD Copies MBC/MP I I HIGH COURT DATED:1910812025 S a \) 3 0l ttB 2026 I -k :::;i-', .:, -Ji ORDER WP.No.3018 of 2020 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (> b II<.C ztf,fze