The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 oI 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/ direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari calling for the records in case bearing LTR Appeal No A41L[N367612021 on the file of the Respondent No 2 where in order dated 28-06- 2024 was passed dismissing the appeal filed by Respondent No 5, and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles, 14,21 and 3004 of the Constitution of lndia. _ ,.:: ! lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petitron Lrnder Section 151 CPC praying that in the (.rrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court n ay be pleased to issue interim orders staying all further proceedings pursuant to r;rder dated 2g-06-2024 in LTR Appeal I'Jo A4ILTR/367612021 passed by the Respo,.dent No 2 ltending the disposal of the rryrit petition- Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R. SUSHANTH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: Gp FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.5:--- The Court made the following: ORDER ,ii ffiIEtrEmt 7 .:.:t::-: // a THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BEEEMAPAKA - WRIT PETITION No.3772 of 2025 - ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed calling for the records in case bearing LTR Appeal No.AalLTR/3676/2021 on the file of respondent No.2 where in order dated 28.06.2024 was passed dismissing the appeal filed b5, respondent No.5.

2. Heard Sri R.Sushanth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Socia-l Welfare for respondent Nos. I to 4. Perused the record.

3. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner is the owner of Shop bearing No.7-6/5 in lchoda Village, Adilabad District, inherited from his father, r,r,ho had long possession of the property. Respondent No.5 filed Case No.TWAl/08l2O2l before Respondent No.3, claiming that her husband bought the said shop in 1992 and transferred it to her in 2015, and a-lleged that petitioner unlawfully locked the property. However, no police action was taken as it was a civil matter. Pursuant to the same, Respondent No. 3 issued a Show Cause Notice to petitioner However, petitioner denied the claim ald proved ancestral 2 N8K,J W.P. No.3772 of 2025 - i Ji-= ::; r*rl$ ,ri ownership. Respondent No.3, ulde order dat3d Otl.08.2O2l, dismissed the said case, ruling the petitioner as tLre original o\.ner, noting that Respondent No. 5 failed to l)rove ownership transfer and that the alleged purchase by a no'r tribal violated the Telangana Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation Act,

1959. AggI ieved by the same, Respondent No.5 filed an appeal before Respondent No.2, and the same was cLisposed of uide order dated 28.06.2024, setting aside the oidcr passed by Respondent No.3 ald directing the Tahsildzrr- to keep the property lLnder Government custody, relying on house tax records listing Respondent No. 5's husband as o\\,ner, and the sale deed rvas deemed void. During the penden< r, r;f the appeal, the petitioner's mother secured land conversion approval under the NALA Act on 18.O4.2023. Respondent No.2 lruled to address the date of the original transfer, rendering the order a result of non-application of mind. Hence, this Writ Petitic n 4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner made subm issions in lines of r.r'rit affidavit and contended that tl r is Court. vide interim order dated 1O.O2.2025, directed thc parties to maintain status quo in respect of the stttrjcct propert5r. , .::-1:C.Hn€lz ?"...a;: / .1/.,/ NBK,J W.P. No.1772 of 2025 Therefore, he requested to issue orders staying all further proceedings pursuant to the order dated 28.06.2024 in LTR Appeal No. A4ILTRl3676l2o2l passed by Respondent No'2, and also requested to call for the records of the said LTR Appeal

5. Considering the submissions made by both learned counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the matter concerns factual and procedural issues relating to ownership and transfer of the property in question, which require detailed inquiry alrd appropriate adjudication by the Competent Authority. If the petitioner wishes to challenge the order or seek relief, the appropriate course is to file a suitable application or appeal before the concerned authority in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to file the appropriate application/revision before the 1"t respondent within four weeks from the date of this order. Upon fiting of such application, the respondent No.1 is directed to consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of hling of the 4 NAK,J vr,.P. No.3772 of 2025 applicatiorr. In the meantime, both parties arc directed to maintain status quo in respect of the subjec - property as it exists today, in all respects, for a period of frrur months. No Misc,:llaneous applications, if any pendr ng, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// l L. LAKSHMI BABU UTY REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER The Prinr;ipal Secretary, State of Telangana, Tribal W:lfare Depadment' Secretariat. Telangana Addl. Agent to Govt. and Project Officer, ITDA, Adilabird HQRS, Utnoor, Adilabad District, Telangana Special Deputy Collector, (Tribal Welfare) (Agency Divisional Officer), Utnoor, Adilabad District, Telangana The Tahs;ildar, (Subordinate of the Agent), lndervelly I landal. Adilabad District, One CC to Sri R. Sushanth Reddy, Advocale [OPUCI Two CCs to GP for Social Welfare, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD ,lopies -T'elangana. 1 2 3 4 6 7 To, TJ GJ I I I -.:\ -\. ^i\:, i- tl .i rl;l -! ./' HIGH COURT DATED:31 10712025 ) ,,,,, ORDER WP.No.3772 of 2025 16 5ir 2ffi +,. t o SP,AI DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WITHOUT COSTS .l