High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS by directing the actions of the Respondents, more particularly the Respondent No. 4 to 6in interfering into the peaceful possession of the property by demolishing part of the Compound wall of the petitioners subject property without there being any prior notice issued upon the Petitioner in respect lands possessed by the petitioner admeasuring Ac.0-14 Gts, situated in gramakantam of Ambatpally Village, Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, Telangana state, as being illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the Respondent No.4 to 6 herein to pay the compensation of 7 Rs.'10,00,0001 Rupees Ten Lakhs towards the damages occurred to the petitioner subject property. IA NO 'l oF 2025 Petition 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 Respondents No. 4 to 6 not to take any coercive steps in the petitioner subject property, till the disposal of the writ petition, in respect lands admeasuring Ac.0- '14 Gts, situated at gramakantam of Ambatpally Village, Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, Telangana state. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI T.SRIKANTH REDDy Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: cp FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 TO 5: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent No.6: Gp FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER 7 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASI(AR REDDY MIT PETITION No.57O1 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: ". . . .to issue wit, order or direction more partianlarlg one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS by directing the actions of the Respondents more parttcuLarly respondent Nos.4 to 6 in interfeing into the peaceful possession of the properly bg demolishing part of the Compound u.tall of the peLitioners subject propertA uithout there being ang pior notice issuecL upon lhe Petitioner in respect lands possessed by the petitioners admea.suring Ac.0.14 Cts situated in Gramakantam of Ambatpallg Village, Lingala Mandal, Nagarlotrnool Distrtct, Telangana stote as being illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 heretn to pay the compensdtion of Rs.10,OO,000/- Rupees Ten Lakhs towctrds lhe damages occured to the petitioners subject properlA.... "

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

3. It is stated that the petitioners have purchased the land to an extent of Ac.0.2O guntas situated at Gramakantam of Ambatpally Village, Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, under sadabainama/unregistered sale deeds, dated 13.03. 1975 and O3.O4. 1996, and out of the said extent, the petitioner No.1 sold an extent of Ac.0.O6 guntas in favour of third parties and I 7 thus, the petitioners are in possession of remaining extent of Ac.O. 14 guntas, which is adjacent to Gramakantam of Ambatpally Village, Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District.

4. Sri T. Srikanth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are in possession of remaining extent of Ac.0. 14 gts of land by encircling the same with compound wall but the respondents claiming that the said land is Gramakantam village site has demolished part of the compound wall without issuing any notice. It is further submitted that constructions made by the petitioners is not of recent origin and therefore, the respondents are not entitled to invoke the summarw procedure under the Land Encroachment Act, 1905. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goverament of Andhra pradesh v. Thummala Krishna f,aiao r case.

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submitted that Grama Kantam/Village Sites are vested in the State as per Section 1Ol of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, l3l7 Fasli and therefore, the revenue authorities are competent to issue notice ' elR tqsz sc tort L 3 for eviction and also collect the penal charges for occupation of the Grama Kanlarlr I Village Sites.

6. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for both sides ald perused the record. 7 . There is a dispute with regard to nature and classihcation of the subject lands as to whether they are Grama Kantam / Village Site as claimed by the respondents or the patta lands as claimed by the petitioners. It is settled law that respondents are not having any power or authority to invoke the sunimary procedure under the provisions of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 if the constructions are not of recent origin and they are only entitled to take steps for removal of the encroachment if it is of recent one. \ \

8. Since it is the case of the petitioners that they are in possession of the subject lands since long time and the respondents have demolished part of the compound wall without conducting any enquiry, this Court is of the view that ends of I I justice would be met if the respondents are directed to follow the procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and also the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajendra Kumar Barjatya and .1 ( \ another vs. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas parishad and others2, after issuing notice to the petitioners and after providing them an opportunity of hearing, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioners. Till passing of orders, the respondents are directed riot to take any coercive action over the existing structures on the subject land. in any manner. I With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ' Civil Appeal No.l4604 of 2024 dated 17 .12.2O24 //TRUE COPY// SDi.A.V.S.PRASAD REGISTRAR ^'ffi=H ON OFFICER I t i \ To 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I 10

11. PSK. GJP s The Principal Secretary, Panchayathraj Department, Secretariat buildings, Tankbund, Hyderabad, State of Telangana The District Collector, Nagarkurnool District The Revenue Divisional Officer, Lingala Mand.al, Nagarkurnool District The Mandal Revenue Officer, Lingala Mandal, NagarkurnoolDistrict. The Revenue Inspector, Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, The Station House Officer, Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District One CC to SRI T.SRIKANTH REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:2510212025 ORDER WP.No.5701 of 2025 H1 i TJ I €' E1 l'l HA 2025 ( ) t .Pe s PAT t o DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @"r* W