✦ High Court of India · 30 Apr 2025

Pathlauath Balya v. 1. State of Telangana

Case Details High Court of India · 30 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
30 Apr 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,002 words

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction, more preferably in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the respondents 2 to 4 herein in not taking any action on the representation of the petitioner dated 11-03-2025 as highly illegal, arbitrary and unconstitution al, being violative of Articles '14, 21 L F F t I. E i t i F ."e+- "7 a=ls--a--z and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and also violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 herein to protect the land of the petitioner admeasuring 200 Sq. Yards in Sy. No. 50 of Medipally Village and Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District from interference and encroachment by the 57 respondent herein and to cancel the allotment $ranted in fSvour of the Sth respondent herein by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 1 1- 03-2025. lA NO: 1 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 2 to 4 herein to protect the land of the petitioner admeasuring 200 Sq Yards in Sy, No.50 of Medipally Viltage and Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District from interference and encroachment by the Sth respondent herein and to cancel the allotment granted in favour of the 5rh respondent, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 'l 1-03- 2025, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PARAVASTU KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: SRI L. RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.S: -- The Court made the following: ORDER {t t- T F i I F r I b r t tL I 6 I HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13542 of2025 ORDER It is stated that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of plot No. 15, admeasuring 20O square yards situated in Sy No.50 of Medipally Village and Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, having purchased the same through registered sale deed bearing document No.9556 of 2024, dated 07. IO.2024. It is further stated that the petitioner's vendor and his predecessor-in- in terest are the absolute owners, having purchased the subject property through registered sale deeds. It is further stated that, while the matter stood thus, respondent No.5, claiming to be an allottee of the land admeasuring Acs.4.18 guntas in Sy.No.49/ 1, Medipally Village, is frequently interfering with his peaceful possession and causing obstruction of the construction and therefore, he made a representation, dated i 1.03.2025 to protect his land in Sy.No.SO' The grievance of the petitioner is that, even after receipt of the said representation, respondent authorities did not consider the same'

2. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petilioner and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. In view of the nature of relief sought for in this I I \ 2 CVBR, J \Vp_ 13542-2025 writ petition, issuance of notice to the unofficial respondent is dispensed with. 3. A careful reading of the contents of the afhdavit filed in support of the writ petition would reveal that there are disputes with regard to the identification of the land forming part of Sy-Nos.49 and 5O as the petitioner is claiming that he purchased the property in Sy.No.50 whereas respondent No.5 claimed that he was allotted the land in Sy.No.49. These issues, in my opinion, are required to be adjudicated by the competent civil Court after considering the evidence and as such, this writ petition filed is misconceived. The petitioner is granted liberty to approach thc competent civil Court and obtain necessary orders restraining respondent No.5 from interfering with his possession. 4. With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed of. Thcre shall be no ordcr as to costs. 5. As a sequei, the miscellaneous petitions pendin6J, if any, shall stand closed. \ To, //TRUE COPY// SD/. P. PADMANABHA REDDY DEPUTY REGISTRAR sEcrl6N oFFrcER '1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Telangana, State Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The District Collector, Medchal-Malkajgiri District lntegrated District Office Complexes, Anthaipally Village, Shamirpet Handal, IVledchal-Malkajgiri District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Keesara Revenue Division, Medchal- Malkajgiri District. 4 The Tahsildar, Medipally Man{al, Medchal-Malkajgiri District' 5 One CC to SRI PARAVASTU KRISHNA, Advocate [OPUC] \ - .'r - i[]'-.!.4g.-*-'.---?-T ".:i,.i : :..,lrr!;i6*&e,. iq'*&rl..r*ro.*r44jr':.: r aF:::':au+!79=-T"-5"'- !**;9 r.i rt*,j.i..r ,-. . !j,.. t I t\ r *rn,e S*

6. Two CCs to GP fgr Revenue, High Court for the Slate of Telangana at Hyderalad. [OUT]

7. Two CD Copigs MP SS F I f Ir i I r / , I HIGH COURT DATED:3010412025 , I O. lEi- ri iJ I t '-. \ s* :.; / ORDER I WP.No.13542 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \ r. r i F F i: 1/l t/q-

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