The High Court · 2025

De pa rtm e nt, A rmoo r Re p. by i ts Co m m i ssio ne r Armoo r, *,i.H?L1%rnltjricj r, 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents in interfering with peaceful possession of the. Petitioner by excavating part of the land admeasuring 640 sq. yds., in Plot Nos. 7 and 11 situated in Sy. Nos. 2211,2212 and 2213 situated at Kotarmoor village, Armoor Mandal, Armoor Municipality, Nizamabad District without notice as being arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and Articles .14_,21 and 300-A of The Constitution of lndia consequently forbear the Respondents from interfering the aforesaid premises of the Petitioner. 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 pteased to pass an order restraining the Respondents from interfering with the Petitioners peacefut possession over land admeasuring 640 sq. yds., in Plot Nos. 7 and 11 situated in Sy. Nos. 2211,22t2 and 22t3situated at Kotarmoor village, Armodr [Vlandal, Armoor Muniiipality, Nizamabad District. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI D.JAGAN MOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 4: SR! L.RAVINDER, Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI LAXMALLA SANDEEP, AGP FOR REVENUE counsel for the Respondent No.6: sRl P.KRISHNA REDDY, sc FoR MpcL AGP FOR IRRI & CAD The Court made the following: ORDER 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioners by excavating part of the land admeasuring 640 sq.yds., in Plot Nos.7 and I I situated in Survey Nos.22ll , 2212, 2213 situated at Kotarmoor village, Armoor Mandal, Armoor Municipality, Nizamabad District (subject property for brevity).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property. He would submit that petitioner No.l is the owner of subject land. having exchanged it under registered exchange deed vide document No.793 of 2012 dated 16.02.2012 from Sri P.Bhoopathi Reddy, P. Narotham Reddy and Sri P.Venkateshwar Reddy. He further submit that land has been converted from agricultural land to non-agricultural land vide proceedings No.A3l6 1 23 12010 dated 3.1 I .2021, A3 I 612412010 dated 3. 1 I .20 1 0 arld A3/6125/2010 dated 3.11.2010 under the provisions of Telangana Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes), Act,2006. He relied upon the demarcation certificate dated24.12.2010 along witfu map which demonstrate that there is no govemment land included in the proposed layout. He would further submit that the said layout has been approved vide Lr.No.L.Dis.No.l303/HRO/HI dated 14.02.201I through L.P.No.04/201llHRO/Hl of Regional Deputy Director, Town Country Planning, which shows the subject land as commercial area. He would further submit that a few individuals claiming to be from the office of respondent No.4, 5 and 6 have attempted to interfere with the possession of the petitioner on 16.06.2025 by digging in the land but the same was resisted by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said action, the present writ petition is filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that land in question has clear title flown from the original pattedars through which the petitioner has become successor, without issuing any notice and without following the procedure contemplated J under law trying to interfere with the possession of the petitioner is illegal and thus, would seek to allow the writ petition. 4- Per contra, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue submits that admittedly the land in question has been converted from agricultural land to non agricultural land under the Telangana Agricultural Land (conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes), Act, 2006 and further submits that demarcation has also been done and demarcation certificate dated 24.tz.zol0 along with map is issued stating that no government land is included in the proposed lay out and layout permission has been given vide proceedings dated 14.02.201 I through Regional Deputy Director, Town Country Planning and further submits that respondent Nos.4 has never interfered with the subject property. He further submits that in the case No.E2l3412020, dated 28.05.2025, a joint survey has been conducted. Accordingly, consequential action has been taken and land has been taken into the possession of. official respondents in the presence of Panchas and hence question of interference into the subject property does not arise. He would 4 further submit that all these aspects are not brought to the notice of this Court by the petitioners and the petitioners have not challenged the proceedings issued by the District Collector in Case No.E2/3412025, dated 28.05.2025 and if aggrieved, the petitioners ought to have taken necessary recourse against the vendors of the petitioners herein and the said proceedings is not under challenge before this Court. Therefore, this writ petition is filed under misconception and hence, would seek to dismiss the writ petition.

5. Sri Laxmalla Sandeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation appearing for respondent No.5 submits that land in question pertains to Canal D-8212/ll2 which has become defunct about 40 to 50 years and as per the directions of District Collector, Nizamabad in 2022,joint survey of defunct canals was conducted to demarcate the canal boundary. After conducting survey, the District Collector has instructed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Armoor to take up fencing activity along the defunct canals to safeguard the Government Property and take up plantation in that area under Haritha Haram programme. He would 1 t 5 further submit that the property in question has been converted into non agricultural land subsequently layout permission has also been taken without putting respondent No.5 on notice under whose possession the property is lying and the same is perverse. Hence, would submit that proceedings have been issued by respondent No.2 stating that the said land belongs to the irrigation department. He would furttrer submit that by virtue of the same nothing would persist in the writ petition and would seek to dismiss the writ petition.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the land in question has been taken into physical possession of the official respondents by conducting panchanama and also it is noticed that impugned proceedings issued by District Collector in Case No.E2l34 /2025 dated 28.05.2025 is not challenged. 6

7. In view of the same, this Court does not find any merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications if any, stands closed. P. PONNA KRISHNA TANT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER One CC to SRI D.JAGAN MOHAN REDDY, Ad Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court forthe tate of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CCs to GP FOR lRRl & CAD, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] One CC to SRI P.KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MPCL [OPUCI Two CD Copies IoPUCI : To

1. 2.

4. 5. PSK. GJP HIGH COURT DATED:03/1 112025 ORDER WP.No.17758 of 2025 \ i- l'i i-- S i/q t {- ;' t, 15 oEr 2ffi sparc r..ri-11 i. DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \^