Mr Asim Jameel Kaseri v. The State of Telangana and 2 Others
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of'
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Learnr:d Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions,, submits that respondent No- 3 is conducting an enquiry based on the representation submitted by the petitioner' However, th.e allegations that respondent No. 3 is interfering with the petitioner's possession, attempting to dispossess him, or…
- Para 88. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of' There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed \ \ To SA //TRUE COPY// SD/.C.DEEPIKA T REGIS N OFFICER State of
Judgment
Mr. Asim Jameel Kaseri, s/o Jameel Ahmed, Aged about 31 yrs, occ; Business, R/o H.No.9-4-1 3312112-8, Flat No. 601, VTC Gotconda, Hyderabdd. .....PETITIONER AND
The State of Telangana, through its Principal Secretary, Home Having office at T.S. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
The Commis_sqoqqr of Police, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Having office at Gachibowli, RR District.
The Station House Officer, P.S. tVloinabad, RR District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 pass an order, direction or a writ particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action on part of the respondent No. 3 in attempting to dispossess the petitioner from his land under Sy. No. 83LU3t2t1, admn. 0.0750 guntas and land under Sy. No.83LU3/1/1, admn.0.1150 guntas, total 0.1g00 guntas, situated at Reddipalli Village, [t/oinabad Mandal, RR District, without following the due process of law, is highly illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice and Article 300 A of the Constitution of lndia. Consequently,.this Hon'ble Cgurt may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 3 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner in respect of his land land under Sy.
No. 83LU3t211, admn. 0.0750 guntas and land under Sy. No. B3LU3/1/1, admn. 0.1 1so guntas, tot€rl 0.1900 guntas, situated at Reddipalli Village, Mofnabad tvlandal, RR District. |.A.NO:1 Ot:2026 Petiticn 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 responcents NO. 2 to 5 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner ir respect of his land land under Sy. No. g3lu3t2l1, adorn. 0.0750 guntas and land under Sy. No.83LU3/1/1, admn.0.1150 guntas, total 0.1900 guntas, situated at Reddipalli Village, Moinabad Mandal, RR District, RR District. Counselfor the Petitioner : SRt MOHAMMAD ADNAN Counselfor the Respondents : Gp FOR SERVICES-|il The court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI{ARAMJI WRIT PETITION 0-4470 0F 20.26 13tt Fe Between: Mr Asim Jameel Kaseri.
AND .Petitioner The State of Telangana and 2 Others. .Respondents ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief: "...pleased to pass an order, direction or a writ particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action on part of the respondent No.3 in attempting to dispossess the petitioner from his land under Sy. No. 83LU3l2/1, admn. 0.0750 guntas and land under Sy. No. 83LU3llll, admn. 0.1150 guntas, total 0.19OO guntas, situated at Reddipalli Village, Moinabad Mandal, RR District, without following the due process of law, is highly illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice and Article 3OO A of the Constitution of India. consequently, this Honble court may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 3 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner in respect of his land land under Sy. No. 83LU31211, admn- O.O75O guntas and land under Sy. No. 83LU3/ 1/ 1, admn....---"
2. Heard Mr.Mohammad Adnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3- I / 2
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 3 is attempting to dispossess the petitioner from the petition schedule property and is interfering with his peaceful possession without m:/ lawful authority. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed seeking appropriate directions.
Learnr:d Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions,, submits that respondent No- 3 is conducting an enquiry based on the representation submitted by the petitioner' However, th.e allegations that respondent No. 3 is interfering with the petitioner's possession, attempting to dispossess him, or threatening him are specifically denied as being without any basis. It is, further submitted that the respondent police are acting strictly within the bounds of law. Accordingly, dismissal of the writ petition is sought. 5 I havt: perused the material available on record'
The petitioner, in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, has specifically asserted that respondent No. 3 is interfering with his possession and attempting to dispossess him without any lawful justification.
Having regard to the submissions made and keeping in view the limitatjons on the powers of the police, particularly in matters t J essentially civil in nature, respond.ent No. 3 is directed to refrain from interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the petition schedule property. The respondent police authorities shall not, in any manner, attempt to dispossess the petitioner or interfere with his life and liberty, except in strict accordance with law and by following due process'
Operative part
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of' There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed \ \ To SA //TRUE COPY// SD/.C.DEEPIKA T REGIS N OFFICER State of
1. The Principal Secretary, Home Having office at T'S' 2 Telangana at HYderabad The Cbmmissioner of Po iice, CyUerabad Commissionerate, Having office at Gachibowli, RR District. s. inJ slaliori House officer, p.S. Moinabad, RR District. 4. Two ccs to cp FbR aERVICES-ilI, High court for the State of Telangana at s. d,;-c-C io SRI tvtbHnuuaD ADNAN, Advbcate [oPUC] Hyderabad. [OUT]
6. Two CD GoPiesv HIGH COURT DATED:1310212026 ) t t-rE $ ,, !.') I02 BI ?0?[ * * ORDER WP.No.,4470 ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOI,.IT COSTS. I ap ahe
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of'
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.