High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe 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 a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of the resiondents, particularly the 6th Respondent - the Station House Officer, Mandamarri, in failing to provide police protection to the petitioner in order to safeguard his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the scheduled property in Survey No' 136/1/1 ' extent of 0.30 guntas, despite a request made by the petitioner vide letter dated 21t12t2024, as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory, and in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-4 of the constitution of lndia and consequen y prays that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to direct the 6th Respondent to provide the necessary police protection to the petitioner to safeguard his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the scheduled property in Survey No. 1 36/1/1 , extent of 0.30 guntas. lA NO: 1 OF 202s Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 6th Respondent to provide police protection to the petitioner to safeguard his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the scheduled property in survey No. 1361111, extent of 0.30 guntas, by disposing of the representation dated 2111212O24, pending the disposat of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. CHILLAW ADVOCATES & LEGAL CONSULTANTS Counsel forthe Respondent No.l to 6: Gp FOR HOME Counsel forthe Respondent No.7: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.g: Ms. SONAL RATHI The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.2959 of 2o25 ORDER: Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned- Government Pleader for Home appearing for ofhcial respondent Nos.l to 6, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.7, Ms. Sonal Rathi, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.S through virtual Mode, and with the consent of the learned coupsel appearing for thr: respective parties, the writ petition IS taken up for hearing and disposzrl at admission stage.

2. Shorn of unnecessarlr details, the case of the petitioner, in brief, is that though the petitioner had approached thc 6th respondent and submitted a representation, uide letter dt.2L12.2024, seeking to provide police protection to safeguard his peaceful possession and enjoyment over the property in survey No.136/ I /l Lo an cxtent of Acre O-30 guntas, the same is not being provided by the respondents, which action of the respondents it is contended as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 3OOA 2 of the Constitution of India, with a consequential direction \i to the 6tr, respondent to provide necessa_ry police protection to the petitioner to safeguard his peaceful possession over the aforesaid property.

3. Petitioner further contends that though the order of the Special Deputy Collector, Utnoor, dt. i 6. O2.2O 1 9 is subject matter of challenge before this Court in Writ Petition Nos.5519 of 2019 and 552O of 20t9, wherein this Court had initially granted an order of sta/zs quo on

18.03.2109, the said writ petitions having been disposed of on 03.05.2024, directing the petitioners therein to avail the alternative remedy of appeal under Scction 3 (a)(iii) of APSALTR Act, 1959, the interim order of status quo granted earlier having been vacated, the responden ts-authorities ought to'have considered the ietter, dt.21.12.2024, submitted by the petitioner for providing police protection.

4. It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that though the order of this Court in W.P.No.5519 and 5520 of 2019 was subject matter of a writ appeal ulde W.A.No.400 of 2024, since, in the said writ appeal, the order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the aforesaid writ petitions having been set aside and remitted back to the learned Single Judge to decide afresh, inasmuch as no interim order is existing, the respondents-authorities cannot refuse to provide police protection.

5. Per contra, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents submits that since, the order of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP.Nos.55l9 and 5520 of 2Ol9 was interfered with by a Division Bench of this Court in WA.No.4O0 of 2024 by setting aside the same, the matter stands restored to the file of the Court, whereby all the earlier orders including the order of stafus quo granted in W.P.No.5520 of 2Ol9 would continue to operate, and as such, the petitioner cannot approach the respondents- authorities and seek for providing police protection to safeguard his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Iand to an extent of Acre 0-30 guntas in survey No.136/1/1, which is subject matter of the aforesaid writ petitions. 4

6. I have taken note of the respective submissions made. 7 . Though the petitioner was issued rvith an order b-v the Special Deputy Collector, Utnoor, uide proceedings dt.16.O2.2019, admittedly, the said proceeding is subject matter of chailenge before this Court in W.P.No.5519 and 5520 of 2079, and that this Court had initiaily granted an order of status quo on 18.O3.2O2 I in W.P.No.552O of 2019.

8. Further, though the aforesaid writ petitions initially having been disposed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 03.05.2024, relegating the petitioners therein to avail alternative remedy of appeal, the said order having been interdicted by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.4OO/2024 by setting aside the order passed in the a-foresaid writ petitions and remitting the matter back for adjudicatio-n a-fresh, the interim protection in the form of status quo order granted earlier on 18.O3.2021 in W.P.No.552O of 2079 would automatically stands revived, zrnd thus, the petitioners in the aforesaid Writ petitions ,,:& 5 cannot be put disadvantageous position having succeeded in appeal.

9. Thus, this Court is of the view that the petitioner should take steps either to get the order of status quo passed by this Court on 18.03.2021 in W.P.Nos.5520 of 2019 vacated or get the writ petitions disposed of, pursuant to the order passed in Writ Appeal remitting the matter back to the learned Single Judge. Till such time the petitioner takes steps as noted herein above, the petitioner cannot seek police protection by approaching 'the respondents-authorities nor the respondents-authorities can consider any such requests made by the petitioner.

10. Subject to the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 1 1 . Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SDIT. JAYASREE DEPUW REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Dr' B R' Ambedkar' Telangana Secretariai, Hyderabad, State of Telangana' The Director General of Police, state of Telangana, office at Lakdikapul, Hyderabad I

3. The Commissioner of police, Ramagundam, peddapalli District. 4. The Deputy Commissioner of police, Mancherial District 5. The Assistant commissioner of porice, Be[ampa y, Mancheriar District 6. The station House officer, Mandamani, Mancheriar District - 504231 7. The Tahsildar, Mandamani, Mancherial District. 8 9!e CC to M/s. --_CH|LLAW ADVOCATES & 9. One CC to Ms. SONAL RATH|, Advocate [OpUC] 10.Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at CONSULTANTS, Advocate tOpUCI LEGAL Hyderabad [OUT] 1'1 Two ccs to GP FoR REVENUE, High courtforthe State of rerangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 'l2.Two CD Copies BSR LS Fr- t\tu j.!l,: i -..] ri1: :;il:,.,--, -"rS,.$"..- ,, -,d HIGH COURT DATED:0910412025 \ t \ \ ORDER WP.No.2959 of 2025 ()B THC SI4 re l 0 5 :lAY 21ffi '/- t 1t ". C] a/ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS .",C"4 1C ff.tt-' u