✦ High Court of India · 10 Apr 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 10 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
10 Apr 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,008 words

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a. writ in the nature of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction, order or orders declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 to 4 in interfering with the peaceful possession of the Petitioner's land admeasuring Ac. 3-00 gts, in Sy No 191 situated at Kollur Village' Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. lA 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 Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 not to interfere into the Petitioner's land admeasuring .. E I I ] tF I r r it-i 7 Ac. 3 - 00 gts. ir { ,. No 191 situated at Kollur Village, Ra m:; chandrapuram ttrlandal, SangareJ,Jl District without following due process of law, pending disposal of the abr:r'e \'/rt petition. t I ! Counsel for the Petil oner: SRI MOHAMMED NAWAZ HYDER ALI Counsel for the Resl nndent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Resl ondent No.4: GP FOR HOME The Court made th,e ollowing: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASI{AR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1O931 of 2o25 ORDER: It is stated that the petitioner is the Ex-serviceman and taking into consideration of his serwices as Logistics Specialist (Regimental No.64539) in the Army, he was assigned land admeasuring Acs.3.OO guntas in Sy.No.191, situated at Kollur Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Sanga Reddy District urde proceedings No.A/s/ 1124/7I, dated nil-O5. 1972 as per the policy enunciated by the Government uide G.O.Ms.No.743, dated 3O.O4.1963 and as per the said G.O. "each Jawaan will be eligible for the grant of an extent of Acs.2.50 wet or Acs.5.OO dry land provided that the total extent of land already owned by him plus the land assigned to him, shall not exceed Ac.2.5O wet or Ac.5.O0 dq/'. It is further stated that the Government, while revising its policy enunciated in G.O.Ms.No.743, has issued G.O.Ms.No. I 117, Revenue (Assignment I) Department, dated 1 1. 1 1. 1993, wherein the Government directed the Commissioner of Land Revenue to permit the Ex-Servicemen could sell away the assigned lands after 10 years from the date of assignment. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities, without issuing any notice and without 2 C\,'BR. J itp I09l I 2025 --.-,,! conductinq r 1v enqulry, are possesslorl i t d causing obstruction for enjoving thc subject interfering wilh hr s peaceful properl l'. '2. O,rr: sic . rcd the submissions made by the learrLec counsel for the oe t: t i ;-rer; Sri H.Somaiah Ezra Sastri, lcarr e:[ , \ssistant Govern rne r t 1'leader for Assignment, appearing for rer';ponden[ Nos.1 !r 3 r r .d the learned Assistant Governlnenl Pl:ader for Home appca -,:rg for respondent No.4 and with t.tre ir consent, this.u,rir f ,e li :rn is being disposed of at the admissiort s tage. 3- l,r::t -:re Assistant Government Pleader for -\s,;ignment and the 1:;rr - t:d Assistant Government Pleader [or' [{c me have not dispr-ttcr that the land was assigned i;t far':tu i of the petitioircr r-rd not disputed the is:rrli, nce of G.O.Ms Nr 1l :7, Revenue (Assignment-l) Departrr,cr t, dated

11.1i.19!1, rllowing the Ex-servicemen to alienatt: t-re lands assigncd ;r r (:ir favour after a period of lO yeals.

4. It ir; rs :led iaw that once the land is assignccl and the said land r s : .lowed to be enjoyed as absolute own':r and also permit t ) lienate the same uide G.O.Ir{s.No I I 17, the responderrt rL,Lthorities do not have any right or . ut lority to .lt 3 CVBR. J Wp 10931 2025 interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner or cause any obstruction in enjoying the same as absolute owner.

5. In view of the above submissions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the respondents to follow due process of law, if they have any claim over the subject land.

6. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

7. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- N. SRIHARI DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principle Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariate Building, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad. District.

2. The District Collector, Sangareddy District. 3. The Tahsildar, Ramachandrapura'm Mandal Sangareddy Diskic! 4. The Station House Officer. Rimachandrapuram Police Station, Sangareddy 5. One CC to Sri Mohammed Nawaz Hyder Ali, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at 7 . fwo CC to ihe GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, at HyderabadIOUT] 8. Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUT] To, TJ SS frtc- I r F F !, F p I HIGH COURT DATED:10104t2025 l \ t ORDER WP.No.10931 of 2025 -- a= y'i;"' !).:{1t; i'3 \'; \,.'t ':.: I lr. " a-i f.qSEt1 e l\\( A,il I 2|,Z5 *,| ^*,// - lt attE) --/' ===:=7 DISPOSING ()F THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CCIISTS >,lf l>s I I L B t F I ; F i b H }* i' V F F F r ; t

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments