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 an appropriale Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent authorities in threatening to demolish the petitioners house bearing D.No. 5-1-7, KSM Area Paloncha Town, Paloncha, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, without following the due process of Law as being illegal, arbitrary, u nco nstitutional and violative of Articles 21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndra and consequently direct the respondent authorities not to take any coercive steps without following the due process of Law, and to grant. lA NO: 1 oF 2020 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the ( ircumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court rr ly be preased to direct the respondent authorities not to demorish or in any m,r lner rnterfere with ther peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner rr respect of the houst. bearing D No- 5-1-7' KSM Area paroncha Town, paroncha Ihadradri Kothagudem District, pending disposal of the main Writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI KARUNAKAR REDDy Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: Gp FOR REVENUI: Counsel for the Respondent No.5: ___ The Court made the following: ORDER ,,- ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.S L82 0F 2020 This Writ Petition is filed seeking writ of mardamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in threatening to demolish the petitioner's house bearing D.No.S-1-7, KSM Area Paloncha Town, Paloncha, Bhadradri Kothaguem District (hereinafter wiil be referred to as .subject property), without following the due process of law, as illegal, arbitrar5r and unconstitutional and violative of Articles 2I and 3O0-A of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondent authorities not to take any coercive steps, without following the due process of law.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property, having acquired the same by virtue of a registered Gift Settlement Deed bearing Document No.1856/2007, dated 18.08.2007, executed by her brother, Banoth Kishan. The said Banoth Kishan had earlier purchased the open plot admeasuring 212 square yards from its lawful owner, Smt. Page 2 of5 Gutta Bharathi, for valid sale considerati() r, under a registered Sa-le Deed bearing Document No.9C 7 2004, dated \

30.01 .2004.

3. Smt. Gutta Bharathi, in turn, had purche sed the said land under a registered Sale Deed bearirl Document No.7634/1998, dated 28.12.1998. The said plr falls in Sy Nos. 444113, 444/17, and 444 118. After ptrchasing the land, the petitioner's brother constructed a gror. nd and first floor building, which was assessed and allotted r oor number 5-1-7, and he was regularly paying property t,r < to the 5th respondent Municipality.

4. Learned counsel further submits that tt e petitioner made an application on 14.05.2009 for mur.i tion of the property in her name. The Stl, respondent, after considering the report submitted by the Revenue Inspector trarsferred the said property in her name vide procee i ngs R. O. C No.Al / 444 / 2009, dated 26.06.2OO9

5. However, the 4th respondent, without v :rifying the relevant revenue records, issued a notice dated t9.01.2020, alleging that the house constructed on the subject property belongs to the Government. He further submits that the respondent authorities, without following due process, visited the subject property on 03.03.2020 and demarded that the petitioner vacate the premises. Though the petitioner submitted all relevant documents to the 4th respondent, the authorities are threatening to demolish the property. He, therefore, prays for allowing the Writ Petition

6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and upon instructions, submits that the construction of the house by the petitioner 1n Sy. Nos. 444/13, 444/17, ar,d 444 118 was carried out without any subsisting surveyor's report. He submits that the petitioner 15 1n illegal occupation of the land and that the Gift Settlement Deed, a-lleged to have been executed by her , I I brother, is not genuine. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the Writ Petition 7 . Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, ald Page 4 of5 \ \l --<'Yj{ upon perusa-I of the material placed before this Court, and - without expressing any opinion on the merits or' lemerits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to d i ect the 4th respondent not to take arly coercive action witho rt following due process of law. If the situation so warrar ts, the 4*, respondent is at liberty to proceed in accordan: ) with law, strictly following the procedure prescribed.

8. With the above direction, this Writ Petitior .s disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stzr: Ld closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- A. JAYASREE iTFNT nECrStRlR = * 'o \' '=:-:-- $Lcrroru oFFrcER ASqX \ To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretttt at, State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

2. The District Collector, Bhadradri Kothagudem District 3. The Sub-Collector-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Kotl Kothagudem District.

4. The Commissioner, Paloncha tvlunicipality, , Paloncha, Kothagudem Distnct

5. The Tahsildar, Paloncha Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudert 6. One CC to SRI KARUNAKAR REDDY, Advocate [OPIJ 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the S:i [our]

8. Two CD Copies MMT GJP Pt tc1 agudem, Bhadradri lhadradri r District. )l te of Telangana. HIGH COURT DATED:0711012025 t t ORDER WP.No.5182 of 2020 Y C(r0 * SI,q ill ?028 : ..::.' ' "''-' 't, =C)x.-\ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITON WITHOUT COSTS @t* >'t-\rn14