High Court · 2025

Judgment

2. J.

5. State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad. The District Collector, Rangareddy District The Tahsildar, Keshampet Mandal Rangareddy District, The Bhoodan Yagna Board, Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad The Commissioner of Appeals, Hyderabad at Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS

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 a writ more particularly in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents more particularty that of respondent No. 2 to 4 in :it. "--<'-_'-'1 seeking to dispossess the petitioners from the subject land without following the due process of law an. d without any notice whatsoever is challenged in this writ petition as being arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article i4, i9 (1 ) (g), 21 and 300- A of The Constitution of lndia and consequently direct respondents NO. 2 to 4 not to dispossess the possession of Land in Sy No. 120,121 ,122 to an extent of 17- 38, Sy No. 122 to an extent of Ac. 3- 00, Sy No. 122 to an extent of Ac. 3- 00, Sy No. 119 to an extent of Ac. 2- 00, Sy No. 120 to an. extent of Ac. 4- 0O and Sy No. 122 to an exent of Ac. 1- 00 totally admeasuring Ac. 30- 38 gts situated at Vemula Narva Village, Keshampet Mandal, Rangareddy District without following due process of law. 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 respondent No. 2 to 4 to not to interfere with the possession of the tand in sy No. 12O,121 ,122 to an extent of 17-38, Sy No. 122 to an extent of Ac. 3- 00, y No. 122 to an extent of Ac. 3- 00, Sy No. 1 19 to an extent of Ac. 2- 00, Sy No. 120 to an extent of Ac. 4- 00 and sy No. 122 to an extent of Ac. 1- 00 totally admeasuring Ac. 30- 38 gts situated at Vemula Narva Village, Keshampet Mandal, Rangareddy District. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRt. VIJAY B PAROPAKART Counsel forthe Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASI{AR REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 16O96 of 2O25 ORDER: This writ petition is fiied under Article 226 of the Constitution of India sceking for following relief: o...ro lssue a uit more parttcularty in the nature of Mandamu1 declaing th,e action of the respcndents tnore partiattarty that of respondent No. 2 to 4 in seek ry to dispossess the petitioners from the subject land Luithout follou,ttng the due process of la ut and uithout ang nottce tuhatsoeuer is challenged in this uit petition as betng arbitrary, illegal and uiolatiue of Article 14, 19 (1) (g), 21 and 3OO-A of The Constitution of India and consequentlA dtrect respondents NO. 2 to 4 not to dispossess llE possesston of land in Sg.No. 12O, 121, 122 to an extent o_f 17-38, Sg No. 122 to an ertent of Ac. 3-00, SA No. 122 to an ertent of Ac. 3-0O, Sg No. 119 to an ertcnt of Ac. 2-00, Sy No. 120 to an @ctett of Ac. 4-00 and Sg No. 122 to an exteftt of Ac. 1-0O totaltA admeasuing Ac. 30-38 gls situated at Vemuta Narua Vttlage, Keshamtrtet Mdnd.al Rangated.dA Distict tuithout follou.ting due proccss of law.--"

2. Considere<i the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and with their consent this writ petition 1S being disposed of at the admission stage

3. It is stated that the petitioners are pattada-rs of agricultura-l lands forrning thc part of Sy.Nos.l2O, l2l, 12?& an extent of Ac. 17-38 gts, Sy.No. l22 to arr extent I , 2 CVBR, T lLP.No.16096 of2025 of Ac.3-00, Sy.No. L22 to €rn extent of Ac.3-0O, Sy.No.119 to an extent of Ac.2-00, Sy.No. l2O to arr extent of Ac.4-00 and Sy.No. 122 to an extent of Ac. 1-00, total admeasuring Ac.30-38 gts situated at Vemula Narva Village, Keshampet Mandal, Rangareddy District, having purchased the same under various registered deeds. It is further stated that the revenue authorities mutated the names of the petitioners in the revenue records ald they are also receiving various incentives being sanctioned by . the Government. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite the sarrre, respondent No.2 isstred proceedings dated

13.O2.2OO9 in file No.EL/4644/2006 declaring that the subject lands are Bhoodan lands and the respondent authorities are making efforts to dispossess the petitioners from the subject land, without follorving due process of law.

4. Sri Vrjay ts Paropakari, learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the procedure adopted by respondent Nos.2 to 4 to dispossess the petiticners from the strbject lands is not in accordance rvith law and the ;r.itj I I i I I I I I I J cyBR, J t!',P.No.16096 of 2025 respondents arc only entitled to reccver the same by following due procedure of law.

5. Sri G.Kiran I(uma,-, leai:r.ied Standing Counsel for Bhoodan Yagna Board i.c., responclent No.4 herein vehemcntly cohtendecl that the subject lards were initially assigned to the beneficiaries u,der Sectio, 14 of the Bhoodan ancl Gramdhan Act, 1955; and ti,.erefore, the petitioners are not entitled to alienate the suitject lands, as they are not havirrg any independent right and it is prohibited under the provisions of Bhcodan ald Gr.amdha.n Act, 1965.

6. At this stage, leanldd counscl fbr the petitioners fairly submits that the petitioners- have fiied arr appea,l on the file of respondent No.S, which rvas numbered as p3/14g/2O14 and the said appeal is pending for adjudication.

7. This Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, as the petitioners are claiming possession and the same is denied by the respondents, to meet the ends of justice, it is directed that stafus quo obtarrring as on today shall be maintaihed by the parties in respect of the subject land in all respects and further, respondent No.S is directed \ 4 CVBR, J l/.P-No.16096 of2025 to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order'

8. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shajl stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- K.BHAVANI SWAMY ISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue, Secretariat, S Hyderabad. of Telangana,

2. The District Collector, Rangareddy District 3. The Tahsildar, Keshampet Mandal Rangareddy District, 4. The Bhoodan Yagna Board, Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad 5. The Commissioner of Appeals, Hyderabad at Hyderabad 6. One CC to Sri Vijay B Paropakari, Advocate IOPUCI 7. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] TJ LS B. Two CD Copies v , u ,..:..... ,.. 1. '. \i ,\\ I t" /J, 1[NBM D E spATctr g{) HIGH COURT DATED:1310612025 ORDER WP.No.16096 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,// II /2