High Court · 2025

10. Ramanakolla Srinivas, S/o: Yadaiah, aged 4'l years, R/o Manikonda, Hyderabad.

11. Ramanakolla Kiran Kumar, S/o: Yadaiah, aged 40 years, R/o Manikonda, Hyderabad. '12. Ramanakolla Yadaiah, S/o: Ramchander, aged 61 years, R/o Manikonda, Hyderabad ...PETITIONERS AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Distribt Collector, Rangareddy District at Hyderabad 3. The Tahsildar, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

4. The Station House Officer, Manikonda Police Station h4anikonda, R.R.District. 5. The Tahsildar,, Gandipet Mandal, R.R. District. R5 is impleaded as per C.O. dt.1511212021 in LA. Nc.1/21 ,..RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the, High Cou( may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particuiar y one in the nature of Writ of lVandamus, declaring the action of the re:;pondents particularly Respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property an extent of 200 sq yards each of the petitioners in Sy.No.65 situated at [tr'lanikonda Jagir village, Gandipet Mandal, Rangareddy District as illegal, arbitrary. violation of principles of natural justice and unco nstitutiona I and violation of fundamental rights and consequentially to direct the respondents not to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners propedy to an extent of 200 sq. yards each in Sy.No. 65 situated at hrlanikonda Jagir vil age, Gandipet l\,4andal, Rangareddy District without following due process of law. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 not to dispossess the petitioners from the property of an extent of 200 sq. yards each in Sy.No 65 situated at lr,4anikonda Jagir village, Gandipet Mandal., Rangareddy District, pending the disposal of writ Pr:tition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI METTU SHANKAR Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent No.4: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.6225 OF 2O2O ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is hled questioning the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 in interfering riiith the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners in respect of property to an extent of 200 Sq.Yards each in Sy.No.65, situated at Manikonda Jagir Village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District (hereinafter referred to as 'subject property') and sought a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject property.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the record.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the father of the petitioners was the owner and possessor of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.OO guntas 1n Sy.No.65 situated at Manikonda Jagir Village, Gandipet / ,,.11 2 SK,J Mandal of Ranga Reddy District, which rvas allotted to him vide Patta Certificate No.B2lSSZ4177 riated:N1l_12_LgZ2 and consequent on death of their father, the petitioners made application to the respondent No.3/Tahsildar, on 28.05.2005, to allot equal shares in th,: subject propert5r owned bv their father and accordingly, after detailed enquiry possession certificates wer(. issued to the petitioners in Lr.No.B/2932/2025 dated (),1.07.20O5 by the Deputy Collector ald Manda_l Revenue ()fficer, Rajendra Nagar, thereby each petitioner has got 2OO Sq.yards each. While it being So, without issuing any notice, the respondent No.3 threatening the petitioners to dispossess from the subject property.

4. The learned for the petitioners submits that, while admitting the Writ petition this Court granted interim orders on 09. l7.2O2O directing the res.:ondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the sutrject land until further orders. \ SK,J 5 Even aJter lapse of nearly more than four years respondents did not chose to file vacate petition or counter denying the averments made by the petitioners in the Writ Affidavit. 6 In view of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject property without following due process of law. No order as to costs. 7 Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, this Writ Petition, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER enue Department,

1. The Principal Secretary, The State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The District Collector, Rangareddy District at Hyderabad 3. The Tahsildar, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4. The Station House Officer, Manikonda Police Station Manikonda, R.R.District. 5. The Tahsildar,, Gandipet Mandal, R.R. District. 6. One CC to Sri Mettu Shankar, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at

8. Two CC to The GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] Hyderabad[OUT] 9. Two CD Copies To, TJ GJP HIGH COURT DATED:0610212025 ORDER WP.No.6225 of 2020 ? ((( I 1f-'ilt;t C, 22APNflE t \ c lJ , .3', \\\,\q 'r'''''' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,/4 /z ?, A3