High Court · 2025

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to the respondents, more particular to Respondent no.3, 4 and 5 to not dispossess the Petitioners without following the due process of law and to not to interfere with the cultivation of land by the Petitioners withc,ut following the due process of law, as such the acts Respondent are illegitl, arbitrary, unjust, u nconstitutional, violation of principles of natural justice, and in vrolative of Article 14, 21 and 300-4 of The Constitution of lndia lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour:. may be pleased to pass such directions as the Hon'ble Court deem fit, directing the respondents more particularly the respondent no.3, 4 & 5 to not to interf,tring with livelihood and to not to interfere with the cultivation of land by the petitioners without following the due process of law. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SYED YOUSUF Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: SRI L. RAVINDER, A.Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.S: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 & 7: - The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17 625 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is hled seeklng the following relief: ". . .. fo i.ssue u Writ oJ Mondamus or any other appropiate uit order or direcLion to the respondents more particular to respondent 1[os.3, 4 and 5 to not dispo-s-ses-s the Petitioners tuithout follotaing the due process of latu and to not to interfere with the culti.uation of land by the Petitioners tuithout following the due process of latu as such the acts Respondent are illegal, arbitrary unjust unconstitrttional uiolaLion of principles of natural justice and in uioLatrue oJ Anicles 14, 21 and 3O0A of The Constitution of Ind.ia... ."

2. Considered the submissions of the iearned counsel for the petitioners; Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for l?evenue appearin g for the respondents and with their consenl this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdran.the u,rit petitior-r insofar as petitioner Nos.2 to 7. Permission as sought for is accorded and this writ petition is withdra'"\,n insofar as petitioner Nos.2 to 7 are concerned.

3. It is stated that the petitioner No.1 (Annamoni Anthaiah) is the orrvner and possessor of land to an extent of Ac.l.20 guntas 2 1n Sy.No.249E situated at Kanakamamicli Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy Distnct, having acquired the same b1. ,"vay of registered sale deed vide document No.376/ t9g5, and the revenue authorities have mutated his name ir-L the revenue records and also made entries in 1-B register vrclc, Khata No.21. The case of the petitioner No.l is that claiming the subject land as Bhoodan land, at the instance of respondent Nos.6 and T, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are frequentlv interlering r.r,ith his possession and making efforts to dispossess him from the subject lands. Hence this writ petition.

4. It is evident from the material placed on re cord that the nature of the land in Sy.No.249E to an extent of Ac.1.20 guntas is shown as Bhoodan land anci patta was granted irL favour of. the petitioner No. 1. If the petitioner No. I was assigned Bhoodan lands, the respondent authoriLies are having por.r,,e r of resuming the lands by following the procedure contemplatr:d under the _ provisions-.of the Telangana Bhoodan And Gramd an Act, 1965 (for short 'Act, 1965'). The grievance of the petitioner No.1 is that without following the procedure under the provisions of the Act, 1965, the respondent authorities are makinll efforts to dispossess him from the subject property and the said action on J the part of the respondent authorities amounts to violation of principles of nat ural j ustice.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos. I to 4 has not disputed the said fact that the subject land is Bhoodan land and the same is assigned to the petitioner No. 1.

6. In view of the above submissions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitiorrer No.I in any manner without foliowing the &uc procedure . lf it is found that the petitioner No.l has violated ar-ry of the patta conditions, the respondent authorities are at liberty to take action against the petitioner No. I for evicting him from the subject property by following due process of law.

7. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/-K. SREE RAMA MURTHY DEPUW REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, '1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. SECTION OFFICER State of Telangana, 2; The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 3. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Mornabad Mandal, RR Distrtct ( \ MP BS

4. The Revenue lnspector, lt/loinabad Mandal, R.R. District 5. The Station House Officer, Police Station Moinabad, R.R District. 6. One CC to SRI SYED YOUSUF, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to SRI L. RAVINDER, AGP for Revenue, High Oourt for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

8. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the Stale of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

9. Two CD Copies \ I t I HIGH COURT DATED:2410612025 i(ii E s "t4 16 c o ot/- 2 E JUN 2m t'>i a, ,.+ ORDER WP.No.17625 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ea 6ldd