High Court · 2025

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, Direction or Writ, more particularly a Writ of [\/andamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 and 3 in trying to lay road in the private plots of the petitioner i.e., plots Nos. .169 and .181 together admeasuring 466 sq. Yds situated in sy. No.343 of Garmilla Village shivar, Mancherial mandal and [,4unicipality, Esrtwhile Adilabad District, presenfly Mancherial District without following due process of law, without issuing any notice nor paying compensation under the law as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary, contrary to law and the Judgments of this Hon,ble Court and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 and 3 not to interfere with the petitioner's Plots Nos. 169 and 1Bl together admeasuring 466 sq. yds situated in Sy. No.343 of Garmilla Village Shivar, Mancherial mandal and Municipality, Esrtwhile Adilabad District, presently Mancherial District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under {iection 151 CPC praying that in the circunlst;lnces stated in the affidavit filed in s upport of the petition, the High Court rnay be pleased to direct the Responde rt No.2 and 3 not to interfere with the petitiorer's Plots Nos. admeasuring 466 Sq. Yds situated n Sy No 343 of 1 69 and 1 81 toget'r:r tr,4ancherial mandal and Municipality, t:sr'.while Adilabad Garmilla Village Shi rrrr District, presently lrlrrrrcherial District, pending disposal of the ;ai,ore writ petition Counsel for the Petit'oner : SRI V.YADU KRISHNA SAINATH Counsel for the Resr,ondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAT'I DEV counser for the Res5tondents No.2 ' !['LrJIt ffilirXtt Ttt", Counsel for the Respondents No.3 : ASST. GP FOR REVENT,lt: The Court made the aollowing: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAI{ WRIT PETITION No.3376 OF 2025 ORDER: Heard Sri V.Yadu Krishna Sainath, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for 2"d respondent and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for 3'd respondent.

2. Petitioner herein is claiming that she is the absoiute owner and possessor of Plot Nos.169 and 181 admeasuring 466 square yards in Survey No.343, situated at Garmilla Village Shivar, Mancherial Mandal and Municipality, Erstwhile Adilabad District, presently Mancherial District within 2"d respondent Municipality on the strength of a registered Sale Deed bearing Document No.3 12 1 of 2OOO dated 06.11.2000. According to the petitioner, it is open plot. She is in possession of the said property. Even then 2'd respondent is laying road over the said property without following due procedure laid down in law. In proof of the same, she has filed copies of sale deed, photographs, vacant land tax receipts, etc. \ \ 2

3. Sli Putta Krishna Reddy, learnt:<[ Standing Counsel a.pp raring for 2"d respondent has proc t ce d written instructions cf 2"d respondent stating that otr rece pt of the represen.l-:ttio rr from petitioner, stalf of 2n,1 respon dent has inspectecl thr: said site, observed that the land aclnreasuring

466.66 squal c yards, which the petitioner is clairninll as patta Iand in Survr:.,, No.343, Garmilla Shivar, to the gr:a.er extent of the sakl lz.nd is falling in Survey No.334, Garnril a Shivar, which rs a Go'rernment land. Petitioner having purc rased the said lanrl rn Survey No.343 is now claiming tjre land in adjacent Go z:rnment land in Survey No.334 rf Garmilla Shivar. Or interacting with the local residentt, it was informecl to ttre 2nd respondent staff that they were rsing the said kutcha -,rad (i.e., the land which the petitiorrer claimed) from manv ve ars and no plot exists in the saici rorLd. They also informcc. the staff of th,e 2"d respondent that they even do not knorv q ho is the petitioner. Petitioner r s never ln possession c f the said property and now he is claiming Government [and. However, 2nd respondent has ini iated the said construr:r.ion of a CC road only to facilitate the needs of residents of 'trrard No.3, Tilak Nagar and in the path already 3 being used by the local public. The said written instructions a-re placed on record.

4. The aforesaid written instructions wor-rld reveal that though the petitioner is claiming that she is the absolute owner and possessor of Plot Nos.169 and 181 in Survey No.343, she has encroached into Government land in Survey No.334 of Garmilla Shivar. Perusal of the photographs frled by petitioner would reveal that there is no open plot. There is an existing kutcha road.

5. Admittedly, the a-foresaid sale deed is of the year r I 2OOO. It appears petitioner is not in possession of the said property. There is dispute with regard to the identification of the propert5r. According to the petitioner, the subject property is in Survey No.343 and according to respondent Nos.2 and 3, she has encroached major portion of land in Survey No.334, which is a Government lald. Therefore, the said aspects are factual aspects, which this Court cannot consider in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioner has to approach competent civil Court, establish her right, then approach 2'd respondent. 4

6. In the light of the same, this Writ p rtition is disposed of eralting liberty to the petitioner to tpproach competent ciril Court, establish her right, seek anr ir Ljunction restraining 2,, respondent from laying road and it is for the civil Court t I consider the sarne, then apF,rc ach 2nd respondent w,th a request not to lay road in the said property. Misceilareous petitions pending, if any, sha ll stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. I I t To, sD/- P.Ch ARSr . NAGI\BHUSHAMBA STAN'I REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEC TION OFFICER

1. The Principal S;ocretary, tvlunicipal Administration and Urbart Development Department, S .zrte of Telangana, Secretariat Buildings, Hyd :re bad.

2. The Commissi'rrer, Mancherial Municipality, Mancherial D'is trit t. 3. The Tahsildar, tJellampalli [t/andal, [t/Iancherial District 4. One CC to SR V.YADU KRISHNA SAINATH, Advocate. [OPL C] 5. Two CCs to Gl) FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High Cor' rt 1:r the State of Telangana [O JT]

6. One CC to SR KRISHNA REDDY PUTTA, SC FOR IUUNI()IPCLITY/MC. loPUCl

7. Two CCs b G ) FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State cf T'rlangana at Hyderabad. [OLIT] B. Two CD Copies. BSK GJP ["4 y l-r HIGH COURT DATED:06102t2025 I <1 v .r+ C !: C '(EL4 ', (t J_ C) =& :\ a \ ( '-f ';;,1ivy ORDER WP.No.3376 of 2025 DISPOS!NG CIF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS LY ]n \2,'