The High Court · 2025

Petition Under Articre, 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the writ petition is fired against the action of the respondent No.4 in interfering into the peacefur possession and cultivation of the agriculture land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac'0'09 gts in sy.No.111tc1 , which is situated at Bheemadevaraptti Viltage, - -of and viotation 'n"tpondent Mandal' Hanmakonda District and trying to dispossess the land and also threatening to handover the Bhermadevarapalli Nos'S to 7 and trying to transfer the land petitioner from his "0""" "n'O'n're land of the Petitioner t" tn" of the Petitioner on the iu'n" ot Respondent Nos 5 to 7' without issuing any notice and without following the due process of law is illegal' arbitrary' P'inciples of Natural Justice and also in violation the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct unconstitutionat of Articles 14' 21 andtOO-O "' the Respondent No'4 not to interfere into the peaceful possession and cultivation of the agriculture land of the Petitioner to an extent of Ac'O 09 gts in Sy.No.1'1 1/Cl, which is situated at Bheemadevaraplli Mandal, Hanmakonda District and not to dispossess the Petitioner from his above agriculture land and also not to threaten to hand over the land of the Petitioner to the Respondent Nos 5 to Z anO not to transfer the land of the Petitioner on the name of ResPondent Nos'5 to 7' Village' Bhemadevarapalli l.A. NO: 't oF 20 25 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No 4 not to interfere into the peaceful possession and cultivation of the agriculture land of the Petitioner to an extent of Ac 0'09 gts in Sy.No.1'1 1/C1, which is situated at Bheemadevaraplli Village' Bhemadevarapalli Mandal, Hanmakonda District and not to dispossess the Petitioner from his above agriculture land and also not to threaten to hand over the land of the Petitioner to the Respondent Nos 5 to 7 and not to transfer the land of the Petitioner on the name of Respondent Nos 5 to 7 pending disposal of the writ petition' Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR counset forthe Respondent Nos'1 to 4 : AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.S to 7 : SRI D.Y.L.N.CHARYULU The Court made the following ORDER THE HO N]BL E SRI JUS TIC ORDER: UIRI T ON E C.V tt7 No. .B REDDY 6Oo f 5 This writ petition is fiIe seeking the following relief: "ro rssue an appropriate "r.,'*:::: the peacerlrl to an extenl ",; ;;:;.;":,:'nto "it,.,.a ., ;;:;;:"" o'",.., ro, .,,.* ; .T:::J::i:: to handover " land and atso threaten. ot"oot'ot"t t^ t ; ;.;a ;ng drrection more parucularry one in the nature ., *.r, ,, ::::'or J:::""T::j:Tffi,::,;:;i"::;,*l f",::.":j#"J:_::: Pe,i,i.n s asriculrurc or Ac o oq grs in Sy.No , , , r.ln' *l'n i" Bhemadevarapa,i Mandal. u;l perrrioner from h is a bove r*"l:::ut"o" the iand ot,r,. p.,i,i.r* ,llicutrure the land of rhe pedrroner rssuing any nolice and *nn"..tnt- "-t ot n""potta'.;,;:":Itf ;, ffi":, foilowing the due ptocess of law is lega], arbitrary, ,".""",,,r,'r"]ro,'.'u-ut or Principles or Natural Justice and also in viorarion "r;;;,.;"" ilf^:'"'"t'"" and 300-4 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the " No 4 not to interfere into the peaceful possession and cultivation or,n """ro I agriculture land of the Petitioner to an extent of Ac.o.09 t" ar.^". , , ,r"ure which i5 s;1vr1.6 ar Bheemadev "^ Bhemadcvarapa0i ,";;",,';.; petirioner from his above ^g.,",'Tukotd" over the rand of the petitioner to'1t'* 'u.'o the land of the petitioner District and ;.r:"J'.:".':'T: and also not to threaten to hand O."oord.nt Nos.S to 7 and not to transfer ontf, on ,n. ,,n. name of Respondent Nos.S to 7 and pass." 2 Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record

3. It is stated that the petitioners are the pattadars of the agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0.09 gts in Sy.No .111/Cl, situated at Bheemadevaraplli Village, Bhemadevarapalli Ma,dal, Ha,makonda District, having acquired the same from their ancestors and since then' they have been cultivating the said land without arry interruption' The grievance of the petitioners is that the 4trr respondent at the instant of respondent Nos.S to 7 is interfering witkr their 2 peaceful Possesslon ald cultivation of the said land and is making efforts to dispossess him from the subject property' 4- Learned Government Pleader for Revenue' on instructions' submitted that the 4th respondent is not interfering with the property disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos'S to 7 and the petitioner, instead of approaching the Civil Court' has filed the present writ petition seeking to resolve the property disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos'S to 7'

5. Learned Standing Counsei appearing for respondent Nos'5 to 7 submitted that respondent Nos 5 to 7 are also having interest over instead of availing the the Petitioner, the subject ProPertY and the Competent Civil Court' has filed the remedies bY aPProaching present writ petition by arraying the official respondents as parties and seeking a direction against the private respondents'

6. It is evident that the parties to this writ petition are inviting this Court to adjudicate upon the issues relating to right' title, and possession of the subject property' In view of the serious disputes with regard to right, title and possession of the subject property, a writ petition is not the appropriate remedy to reSOlVe the inter se disputes between the parties, especially in the absence of examination of the documents rerating to title a.,,d possession of the respective parties. The questions as to who is the rightful ovvner of the iand in question; 3 c "i" -cumstances etc., are materiar his writ petition. In is in possession ' a,d under *r'tt such possession so, since when, hc in possessiot'; *h.' d-vis the ,..r. o*.,n"r consideration ,., ,,'"r, questions of fact, which ^^_ _ court in u o.oo..,f":"-: :": adduced by the ,*.:""::t:ted 226 ofthe constitu,r:""' court and trr" rrortr,' proper remedy for the arrittA:^^-. rights. the subject property' a.d if the} claittl 1o 6" be regarded as legal vis- guestions which arose for -."'r' rlr my view, these are pure addressed by a civil ci'il suit, based on the evidence ""' not in a writ petition filed under Articre of India' It has beer t consistently heid by this e supreme court that --' L L.dL a regular civi.l suit is the : adjudication of disputes relating to property be appropriaterv Z. In Mohan pand.eg Supreme Court observed as follows: us. tlshq. Rani Rajgariq.t theHonble o It has repeatedlg been helcl b 'g this Court as also bg uanous High Cou r1s that a regular suit is the appropiate remedg for set ement of disputes relating to propertu rights between pri uate persons and that the remedg under Afticle 226 oJ. the co nstitution s hall not be auailable except tuhere uiolation of some statuto ry dutA on the p afi of a statutory au*nrity is alleged- And in such a case the Coult Lui i s sue qppropriate to the authority concemed. If the real grieua d.trectton nce of the respondent is agannst the initiation of ciminal proceedings, and the orders passed and steps taken thereon, she must aueil of the remedg under the general law incLuding the Crimi nsft tutional nal Procedure Code sdtctio remedieS,U nder the qe n to r cl uil orcnmtn Hiah Court d 40t allowthe ru) h Qre auailttbte I to re toce tle o Let dIi U shq td ftot be c LC tcttonls S uo o o s1'it or exirao LCOL totL : pmphasis srryPlied) kr Dwarka Proscrd Agarwal o' B'D' AgarwaP, l1:,e B. Hon'bie Supreme Court observed as follows: "The High court rtthile exercrsing 'bsttre-state*o,totutoru"'rll,t'*l:_.:";:":,:::;:::::;::"::t:- uithittesatits,inationaLtts":;Z;;;;"'i'mpropnetaof ^unorderpassed (t pouer of judrcnl reaettt is concemed

9. ';:;l:"":":::-"::;:;::;;;-:;-;o**':,:::':,"::;;,:";, character' It is alsc ueli-settled thcLt a luit rentedg ts r' resolution of a prapertA or o title dtspute ' It ts well settled lai'r' that this Court is not having into the dispr-ites and come to a conclusion with of the Parties in resPect of the of determining the validitY or decided at the first instance and the ComPetent Civil Court' jurisdiction to delve regard to right, title and possesslon subject ProPertY in the absence otherwise of their entitlement being the said dispute has to be resolve by

10. In view of the above' the 4th resPondent is directed not to interfere with the disputes betu'een the petittoner and resPoncient Nos.5 to 7. However, if anY disPutes are there in between the petitioner and respondent Nos 5 to 7, the same should be resoive by approaching the Competent Civil Court and seek appropriate relief in accordalce with law In the event of obtaining decree, if any, ffOm the '{ t oezl + 966 61 '(2OO31 6 SCC 23O competent Civrl Co cra:m of the petitioneurt' in accordance with ,,t and pass "oo."o.,","1lojl .s the revenue aut] ntt""'' in respect or, tt sha,l examine the '""'''* ";,:. :r;;:t;":.::"J

11. With the at of. There shall be no o Miscellaneous observafions, rder as to costs. writ Petition is disposed applications pending, 11 anY, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII SD/ P. PONNA KRtSHNA TANT RE GISTRAR SECTION OFFICER The Principal Secreta ry, Revenue Department , Secretariat Building, Secretaria t, State of Telangana at Hyderabad The District Collector,Hanmakonda, Hanma konda District. The Revenue Divisio nal Officer, Hanmakon da Division, Hanmakonda District. The Tahsi ldar, Bheemad evarapalli Mandal Hanmakond a District Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Co urt for the State of Telangana at Hyderaba d [oul] One CC to SRI RApOLU BHASKA R, Advocate IoPUCI eCC to SRI D.Y.L.N.CHAR YULU, Advocate (oPUC)

6. 7 B. Two CD Copies To

2. 3. 4. 5. SA LS t ,., .?-/:-':.'-.. i.-((]! 5 I' .. ., O3 sEP 2E ,1coi'iiclt'- r\>l 2tai HIGH COURT DATED:2310612025 ORDER WP.No.11760 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. \ v 11pr