High Court · 2025

6. Tallari Srinivas, S/o T. Sandaiah Aged about 57 years, Occ. Business Ri/o 3-6, Gandamguda, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

7. Talari Durgaiah, S/o T. Yellaiah Aged about BB years, Occ. Business Rl/o 2- 22, Gandamguda, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

8. Tallari Narasimha, S/o T. Yellaiah Aged about 64 years, Occ. Business Rl/o 2- 24, Gandamguda, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District ...PETITIONERS AND

2. ?

4. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department., Secretariat, Hyderabad The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District The Tahsildar, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga reddy district The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajender Nagar Division, Ranga Reddy District. ...RESPONDENTS / PetitionunderArticle226oflheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue the writ of mandamus to respondent no 3 by declaring the orders passed by respondent no 3 under Proceedings' No' B/1059/2024' dt.OB-O2-2O25, subsequent notice dt'08-0 2-2025 to vacate the petitioners in 3 days,asgrossviolationoflaw,againstprinciplesofnaturaliustice'againstdue process of law, against the observations made by this Hon'ble High Court' and same is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently and to set aside respondent no.3 under Proceedings' No' B/1059/2024' orders Passed bY dt.o\-02-2025. IAN O: 1 OF 2025 PetitionUnderSectionl5lcPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to directtherespondentsnottodispossessthepetitionersfromthesaidlandsin Sy. No. 92tpartto 96/part to total extent 5'15 Gts vide bearing H'No'24-96\154\2' 24-96\'155\4,24-96\155\2,96\155\5,24-96\153,24'96115411'24'56h5411' 24-g6t155t3 situated at Gandhamguda Village Bandlaguda Jagir, Municipal Corporation in Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District' and to maintain status- before higher authority as per Land quo, pending disposal of the aPPeal encroachment act. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI KAMBALAPALLI SRAVAN KUMAR REDDY Counsel forthe Respondents: SRI L'RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER I I II HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4863 of 2O25 ORDER: This writ petition is Iiled praying this Court to declare the orders passed by respondent No.3 uide proceedings No.B/ 1059/2024, dated O8.O2.2O25 and consequential notice, dated O8.02.2025, ditecting the petitioners to vacate the premises within three days, as illegal, arbitrary, gross violation of law and violative of the principles of natural justice and consequently prayed for other appropriate reliefs.

2. It is stated that the petitioners are the owners of the small extent of house plots wherein they have constructed residential houses. It is further stated that the said houses assessed the property tax and they also obtained electriciry service connection. It is further stated that the names of the petitioners were recorded in the revenue records as pattadars and pattadar passbooks were also issued to them. It is further stated that the respondents have issued notice under Section 6 of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 alleging that the petitioners have encroached the Government land which is forming part in Sy.No.97, situated at Gandhamguda Village. It is further stated that soon after receiving the said notice, the petitioners have submitted an explanation to the said notice. The grievance of 2 CVBR, J wp_4863 2025 't the petitioners is that the respondents, without conducting the survey and fixalion of boundaries to the land in Sy'Nos'92 to 96, which are adjacent to. the Government land situated in Sy.No.97, have passed the impugned order for eviction and directed the petitioners to hand over the same within a period of three days from the date of receipt of notice'

3. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage' lrarned counsel appearing for the petitioner has 4. submitted that the procedure adopted by the respondents in passing the impugned order and directing them to vacate the property within period of three days is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. Further stated no reasonable opportunity was given to the petitioners to approach the competent Court,aggrieved by the impugned order' Learned counsel further submitted that as per the provisions of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905, if any orders are passed by the original Authority, an appeal is maintainable under Section 10 of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 within a period of 30 days and even before completion of the period of limitation to avail / -) CVBR, ] wp_4863-2025 the remedy, the respondents have passed the impugned order for eviction of the petitioner.

5. Per contra, Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that the respondents have conducted the survey of the land in Sy.Nos'92 to 96 ald also Iand in Sy.No.97 and after identifrcation and localDation, having found that the petitioners have encroached upon the Government land in Sy.Nos.97, the respondents have issued the impugned notice under Section 6 of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and passed a detailed reasoned order ald the same does not require any interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia.

6. Be that as it may, it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that aggrieved by the orders passed in proceedings No.Bli.O59 12024, dated OB'O2'2O25, the petitioners herein have ltled a statutory appeal on the file of the Revenue Divisional Oflicer. It is their case that after hling the said appeal, the respondents have not granted any interim orders and taking advantage of three days time, now the respondents are making efforts to dispossess the petitioners from the land. The procedure adopted by the respondents is in violation of principles of natural justice and also contrary to the I I I I I .1 CVI]R, J Wp_4863_2025 law laid dor.r,n bv the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajendra Kutnar Bo.rjatgq. and q.nother as. U.p. Aoas Eootn Vikas \ Pc,rishad. and othersl.

7. In view of the above, this Court, without going into merits of the case and since it is stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have flled an appeal before the appellate Authority, is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the appellate Authority is directed to dispose of the said appezrl as expeditiously as possible. Ti the disposal of the appeal, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps pursuant to the impugned order uide proceedings No.B/ 1059/2O24, dated 08.O2.2025, in any manner.

8. With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 9 As a sequel, the miscelianeous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed ClVi l-A-140a) No, tlyLotyol2ol ' lV-t2r2b-lr //rRUE copy// To, SD/. P.CH.NAGABHUSHAM BA 5 ANT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Depa(ment, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District The Tahsildar, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga reddy district The Revenue Divisibnal Officer, Ra]ender'Nagar Division, Ranga Reddy District. One CC to SRI KAMBALAPALLT SRAVAN KUMAR REDDY, Advocate loPUcl Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies 2 3 4

5. b. -7 BSR a\x\ HIGH COURT DATED: 1810212025 CC TODAY g STA Ie: 1H ( ORDER WP.No.4863 of 2025 I ).? 3 1s * D ,.4 FIB ?0fr v o .> * Fsrnra. DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION AT THE ADMISSION STAGE, WITHOUT COSTS o I ,I \ f--L.t