The High Court · 2025

11. Mr. Maddtrr Clrrresh, S/o. late Madduri Venkat Swamy, Alled irbout44years, Occu. Busire;; R/o. H.No.3-2-90, Near Hanuman Terrple Hy ierguda, Rajendrana E . l. V Ranga Reddy District. '12.Mr. tvladcur [:l:trnesh, S/o. late IVladduri Venkat Swanry, A3ed about 43 years, Occu. Busine;; R/o. H.No.3-2-90r Near Hanuman Tenple . Hy jerguda, Rayendrari:9,' !'. V Ranga Reddy District. 1 3 M.Jyothirmrr'e i,/o late Vasantha Krishna, {ged about 22 yeats, Occu. Stu6ent, li o - No 3-2- '133, Hyderguda, Rajandran;agar Attrtpur, R R.Distr tl

14.M,Om Praka-"1-, D/o. Late Vasantha Krishna, Aged about li1 ytrars, Occq Student. R/o. I-l No. 3 -2 -13 3, Hyderguda, Raj andrarragar, Altapur' R. R. District. '15.Sama Sandet:p Reddy, S/o. Late Rani Reddy, Aged arbou' 51 'tear, R/o- Upperpallv l\riikrge), Rajendranagar (lvlandal) Ranga Reddy (ttrstrict). 16.Sama Gcvzrrclran Reddy, S/o. Late Ram Reddy, AgerJ abr;ut 50 years, R/o Upperpallv '\/il age). Rajendranagar (Mandal) Ranga Redrly (tristrict). 17.Smt. Santa N4arremma, Wo. Late Ram Reddy, Aged rabor-t 58 yeas, R/o. Upperpallv'\/rllirge), Rajendranagar (Mandal) Ranga Reddy (tristrict). (Res. Nc,s. 1!: .o lf are formal parties, no relief is clained aga nst them) .....RESPONDEN TSiFIESPONDENTS l.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition lJnCr:r Section 151 CPC praying that in the circtrmslances stated in the affidavit filed t-r s;upport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to remand the matter b1 setting aside the impugned orders mace in W.P.No.14941 of 2023, dl. 1?.ti)l'.21'. i':.. allowing the petitioners counsel to put fortl his arguments in the interest cf ju!:t ( e A.NO:2 OF 2025 t. PetitionUnderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned order made in W.P.No.,1494.1 of 2023, dt. l2t3t2o25passedbythelearnedsingleJudgependingdisposaloftheabovewrit appeal. .A.NO:3 OF 2025 PetitionUnderSectionl5lCPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin theaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedtostay allfurtherproceedingsinAppealCaseNo'F2lg43l2o23,onthefileofthe3rd respondenti.e.,theAdditionalCollector(R)(FAC),RangaReddyDistrictpending disposal of the above writ aPPeal- Counsel for the Appellant: SRI V.RAVINDER RAO, LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL REPREdENTING SRI SHAIK ABDUL KALAM RIYAZ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 : AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 14 : SRI M'SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.15 to 17 i - W.A.N 0:674 OF 2025 WritAppealUnderclause,l5oftheLettersPatentprefenedagainsttheorderdated tiozbozs in W P.No.'16221 ot2023 on the file of the High Court' Between: District.

1. Sama Sandeep Reddy, S/o. Late Ram Reddy, Aged about 49 years'-Occ ; ' ;;tft.., Riol upp"irjrrrv virLge, Rajendranagir Mandal' Ranga Reddy 2. Sama Govardhan Reddy, S/o. Late Ram Reddy, Aged aboul 47- years'-Occ ; business, Rlo. uppeiiiirv nittagt' RJlenorariagai Mandal' Ranga Reddv District. .....APPELLANTS t, 7,, AND

1. The Stak of l't:iangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Reverrue Department) ll:cretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

2. The Distlct Crcllector, Ranga Reddy District At Kongara Kalan Ranga Reddy District 3 The Additional (l;ollector, (R) (FAC) Ranga Reddy Dis'trict At l'iongara Kalan, Ranga R,:drjv - sttict.

4. The Spec:ial (.)rade Deputy Collector and Revenue Dirrisiorral C'fficer, Rajendranag;rr fivision, Ranga Reddy District.

5. The Tahs,ildar [{ajanderanagar Mandal, Ra.iendranagar, Flang r Reddy District.

6. G.Venkata livr;:rrv, S/o. Late G. Laxmaiah (Died) As;ler LR's z to '14 7. Mrs. Bagnyil -axmi. Wo. M. Jeevan, Aged about58 1'ear:;..Occu. Household' R/o. H.Nir 18-1-322t A, Shivaji Nagar, Hanuman Ten'ple Upp-rguda, Charminzr t'yJerabad. B. lVlrs. V.Prrshpra, W/o Not Known, Aged about 45 years, Occu llous-ehold, R/o. H.No.3-2-g0 Flirnuman Temple, Hyderguda, Rajendranagar, 1..V. Ranga ReddY D stric' .

9. trilrs. R.Arur a /,r/o R. Narsimha, Aged about 42 years, Or:cu. Household, . Rio. H.No 2l-6t , Khanpur Village, R-jendraoagar Mandal, K V. langa Reddy District

10.Mrs. G.V javalirxmi, Wo. G.Suresh, Aged about43 ye,ars, Occu. Household, R/o. H.Nri iu-1-337 tBt48149, Saibaba Nagar, Moin l3agl, Cl-arminar, Falaknunra f.lr,r1srabad

11.lVlr [t/laddur i iil anesh. S/o. Late Madduri Venkat Swanry, Aged about 44 yeats, Occu. Bus nerss R/o. H.No.3-2-90, Near Hanuman Tenple HyJerguda, Rajendranagirr, K.V. Ranga Reddy District.

12.1r/lr. Madiluri l-i:resh, S/o. Late Madduri Venkat Swarny' l\gec about 43 years, Or;cL.t. 3t siness R/o. H.No.3-2-90, Near Hanuntan'[em:lle, Hyderguda, Rajendranagitr, K V. Ranga Reddy District.

13. M.Jyothlrm''re: [)io. Late Vasantha Krishria, Aged about 22'.yezrs, Occu. Stuilent, Ri: -.\o 3-2-133, Hyderguda, Rajandranagar, Attap tr, Ranga Reddy Drstric;t

14.M.Om Prakas lr. D/o. Late Vasantha Krishna, Aged about 121 ycars, Occu. Student, R/,r -.\o 3-2-133, Hyderguda, Rajandranagar, Attap rr, Ranga Reddy Drstrict 1 5. Smt. LaxntaT'rtra. Wo.Late Laxma Reddy, Aged about 72 yea rs, Occu. Household

16.Sama Sr-rresl reddy, S/o. Late Laxma Reddy, Aged about 56 years, Occu. Business,

17.Sama Suman Reddy, S/o. Late Laxma Reddy, Aged about 54 years, Occu' Business,

18. Sama Syam Sundar Reddy, S/o. Late Laxma Reddy, Aged about 5.2.years' Occu. Business, Respond6nt Nos.15 to 18 are R/o. of Upperpally Village' Rajendernagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

19.Smt. Sama Manemma (died), As per LR's Petitioner No.1 and 2 (Respondent Nos. 15 to 1 9 are formai Parties) .....RESPONDENTS |.A.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 suspend the operation of the impugned order made in w.P.No.16221 of 2023, dt 12t3t2025 passed by the learned single Judge pending disposal of the above writ appeal. I.A.NO:2 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 stay all further proceedings in Appeal case No. F2t94312023 dated 08.05.2023, on the file of the 3rd Respondent i.e. The Additional Qollector (R) (FAC), Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the above writ appeal. Counsel for the Appellants : SRI KATIKA RAVINDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos'1 to 5 : Ms. T.SWETCHA, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 19 : - The Court made the following COMMON JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICID StrJO'ra PAUL AND TFTE HON'BLE SMT, JUSTICE RENTIKA YAIiIA WRIT APPEAL Nos.663 & 674 of 2425 COMMO N {rl_DItMENT (Per the Hon'ble the Acting ('hLe.[,htst r:e Sujog Paul): :r \'. Ravinder Rao, learned Senior Couns )1 represents Sri Shail< .,\1 rl ,r1 Kaiam Riyaz, learned counsel for lhe appellants in W.A.No.(i6.3 <n 2025 & Sri K. Ravinder Reddv leerne i counsel for the appe lliurts in W.A.No.674 of 2025 and Ms. T. Su'etcha, learned Assistant (i rrrrnment Pleader for Revenue, for respor-r lent Nos. 1 to 5 2 r?egirrd being had to the similitude of tl Le questions rnvolve<1, ,)n the joint request of learned counsel for the parties, these mirtle -ii u'ere heard analogously. 3 ,)r u Ln g the course of hearing, learrLed coL nsel for the parlies rc r,: lx:d to a consensus. it is agreed ti-r rt since the appellar- t s r. ve raised the que stion of ma intirrna bility of the appeal p,r:rrrlir g before respondent No.3 and a s tlLe s rid authority has alsc 1ia ssed an ex parte interim order, if the a-;pe11ants file objectiorrs r:garding maintainability of the pen ling appeal u,ithout filir 51 any application for condonation ol de lay and also I 2 file an application for vacation of ex parte interim order, directions may be issued to respondent No.3 to decide the question of maintainability of the pending appeal by hearing the parties and by passing a reasoned ahd speaking order within a stipulated time. It is also agreed that if any application for vacation of stay is filed by the appellants, it may be directed to be decided by hearing the parties within a stipulated time.

4. In view of consensus arrived at, these Writ Appeals are disposed of by reserving liberty to the appellants to file objections regarding maintainability of thc pending appeal before respondent No.3 by raising all possible points and a_lso to file arr application for vacation of stay. In tfiat event, it shall be the duty of respondent No.3 to hear the parties on the question of maintainability of the pending appeal ald also on the application for vacation of stay and pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing u,ith al1 the contentions raised by the parties. It is expected that respondent No.3 shall dccide the question of maintainability of the pending appeal within 30 days from the date of fling of such objections by the appellants. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the cases. No costs. 3 lnt,:r-locutory applications, if any pendin1l, shall also stand cl rs,el1 //TRUE COPY/I sid/- lJ[oHD. lsMAlL DEPUTY REGISTRAR ,,, ISEC TION OFFICER To

4. 5 6 7 B The Prin<;ip'al Si{)cretary' (Revenue Department) Secrr:tariat BL ildings' #;b;i Iior, tr i"rinrjan' at Hvderabad . . .. The Distri.il .ctector, Rr"g;R;l;; Diitri"t nt Kongara Kalan Ranga Reddy ?-rtj|.[:cl tionirr ]orector, (R) (FAC), Ranga Reddv District At (onsara Kalan, Ranga Recidr' [)istrict The Spe:ial (lr rde Deputy Collector an{ R,e.v9nue Divisicnal Officer' nri.i5,i n',o.'Drvision Ranga Reddy District rhe Jah;il lar rrlrnoe'anlg%? itiZii"rln'i""orana(lar' rtans a Reddv ffX'3t6, r, rl [, FoR REVENUE, High court for the i]tatr: of - elangana at Hvderat acl l() JTI n'.,c cc,c sFl KATIKA RAVINDER REDDY' Aqu:qllt" I')PUll H: E; tl sii il dAildH kurvrnn Advocate (oPU(j) one cc to s Flr SHAIK ABDiJ"i'iALAM RIVAZ' Advocate (oF UC) ,

10.Two CD Cc5'i:s SA PVL i1r' I ! I i I j HIGH COURI- C.13. TODAY DATED:0310i't2025 TFo E ( \.. e .9 '-i)l 1i ,,/ 0, .? o '.t- 1!t +H COMMON JUDGMENT WA.Nos.663 ,qND 674 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEALS WITHOUT CI]STS. \?cof"'' w, .(ed'