Sanqam Mallaiah v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that circumstances stated in tn"ifril"ii rir"d tnerewith' the High Court may be pleased oir.iii"",-*ore particularlv i W'it in the nature of to issue a Writ, Order "t Nlandamus declaring tn" ,.io[?in"' i-St,L.ponOeni in not passing any order either in the stay petition or'in irrli"ui.ion petition filed bv the petitioner challenging the orders passed bv tne z'ii lttponJ"nt in LTR Appeai No A4/LTR/199212022 in so far as directing tne +tn les"p-Jnoeni to eject the petitioner from the schedule property i.e. the rrno ,o.J'!'iing n" z'i+ gts in Sv'No 382/2' situated at [Vrandamarri Vilage and rrrrrnoar, R"oitauao Disirict, presentry lvlancherial District and further directing to f"ep tf'e Schedule property into government custody is appeal filed by the sth concerned, though the zni- uno ti" action ot +tt-iespondent in trying to evict the petitioner from the ;;;;;;i land even though the stututorv ieuision filed by the petitioner is pending before the 1st respondent, as ittegai, iOitrary, aOuse bf p'o""tt of law and violation of direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to p;;;i;[;"?;riurat ;ustlce *J "ont"q'"ntlv evict the petitioner from the ;;; ;;;;trring Rc.Z.a+ gts in Sy No' 382i2' situated dismissed .the "sponOent at Mandamarri \/ir,aqe and J!r6ni3l, Adirabad District. preselry Mancheriar District or the revisio" rir"i ov'iil""o.u,",,ionJi'o"ro,." the 1st respondeni in il:tffi"1:T""llr (Prayer Amended as per C.O dated 4t912024 in t.ANO.212(24) IA NO: 10 F 2024 Petition urrd'lr seclion.'151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petitioir 1'h"'nigi'ioro m; y be preased to direcr the respondenrs 2 to 4 tn"'pliii,J".Irr", tre tand aor"rsuiing 1ot Io ""i"1 4c7 34 sts in sv.rro 382/2. situateJ;iN/,fr#H Virage and Mandar, Adirabad 'iil"?,.01.r, District, presenrv l/ranchenar oistri.t tirr or th€ revision fired by the respondent, p"niing oi'[""r of the above writ petition in ir"J [i::Ji:TJ:,,'l:; "t IA NO: 30 F 2024 petition uncJer Section-151 cpc praying that in the cirlumstances stated in the affidavit fired irr :;unoort of the petition-,-tlh"'High'i"rn ma,,be preased to direct the respondents 2 to a 1ot fo dri"t if," f..o. rhe tand ,0r""*iing Ac't'34 sts in sv ^',. 382i2. siruared "i^;r;;;;;; Virage and Mandar. Adirabad District' presentlv [Vancherial oi.tri.t]irr or the revision tited bv the i^"J'lii::Ji:t"jLli: ' ,.u'ponount-p;;di;; ;;#;#r or the ,bove writ perititn in rhe pettioner: sRt K. UDAY KUMAR REPRESENTTNG FoR SRt. S 'iilu"ii.plrrr 3;ff_11"i 'p"tiiiJn"i Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: Gp FOR SOCTAL WI:LFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI SRINIVASA RAO BOI)DULURI The Court made the following: ORDER 1 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK W.P.No. 2OOla qf 2024 ORDER: withtheConsentofboththeparties,thiswritpetitionistakenup lor disposal at the stage of admission'

2. The writ petition is frled with the following prayer: "To issue a writ, order or direction more particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 1* respondent in not passing any order either in the stay petition or in the revision petition hled by the pctitioner challenging the orders passed by the 2"a respondent in LTR Appeal No.A4/LTRI lgg2l2o22 in so far as directing the 4th respondent to eject the petitioner from the Schedule property i e'' the lald admeasuring Ac. 7 34 gts in Sy No 3a212 situated at Mandamarri Village and Mandal' Adilabad District present\ Mancherial Distnct and further directing to keep the Schedule property into Government custody is concerned though the 2nd respondent dismissed the appeal hled by the Sth respondent and thc action of.{th respondent rn trying to evict the petitioner from the land even though the statutory revision hled by the petitioner is pending before the lsl respondent as illegal, arbitrary, abuse of process of 1aw and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to evict the petitioner from the land admeasuring Ac'7 '34 gts in Sy No' 38212 situate<i at Mandamarri Village and Mandal' Adilabad District Mancherial District till the disposal of the revision ltled by the presently before the 1"t respondent in lhe interest ofjustice"' pelitioner I .t a, ..,. .': ::: 2

3. Heard th: learneri counsel for the petitioner, l:arned Government Pleader for Social Welfare for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 ar d Sri Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, for rr:spondent No.S anci perused the record 4. According to the petitioner, his uncle Andugulla Chinna Maltu S/o Rangaiah has purchased the subject larrd i.e. land admeasuring Ac.7.34 guntas in Sy, No.3g2/2 situated at Mandamarri village and Mandal, Adilabad districl on 30.3.1963 through sada binama from the father of respondent Nc,. S by namc Gittaiah and after the dcath of his uncle, petitioner being Lhc son-in-law camc into possession erd cultivating the said property. \Vhile so, respondent No.5 filed LTR petition before respondent No..3 and the respondent No.3 initiated procr:edings under A.p. Scheduled Areas Land Trarsfer Regulation,1959 (Regule tion No.I of 1959) in respect of the subject property and passed orders dated 3O72O2O holding that the.re,is no contravention of the above regul,rtion. Against the said order, respor)dcnt No.5 filed appeal before respondsnt No.2 and the respondent No 2 lismissed the said appeal vide order lated 28.6.2024, upholding the or.d,:r passed by the primary authority date d 3O.7.2020, but however, issued clirections for ejectment of petitioner jrom the subject property. euestioning the said order, petitioner preferrel revision before the respondent No.l-Government on 2O.2.2024 vide Iievision petition No.I3O4/TW.LTR /,)_O2q ard the same is pending Ther efore, petitioner l 3 prays this Court to direct the respondent No 1 to pass appropriate orders on the said revision within a stipulated period of time' 5. The learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare ' on instructions' submits that the revtsion frled by the petitioner is pending before respondent No' I and the respondent No' 1 will decide the revision strictly in accordance with law 6 respondent and without golng of, directing the Having regard to the submissions made by the respective parties into merits of the matter' the writ petition is disposed No.1 to pass appropriate orders on the Revision Petition petitioner vide revision filed No.1304/TW.LT Rl2024'by putting on notice on respondent No'4 and after affording due opportunity to the parties, pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law' as expeditiously as possible' within a period of three months from the daLe of receipi of a copy of this order' Tili such dme, the interim order granted by this Court on 26'7 '2024 ' which was extended from time to time' shall continue' Miscelianeous appiications' if ary, pending in this ivrit petition stand closed ,,TRUE COPYII .rrri'h"[t'+$t SECTION OFF ICER Secretariat, HYderabad Officer, ITDA' Adilabad Flead To, 1 , The PrinciPal Secretary' The Ad dt. Agent to the Quarters at Utnoor' Ad

3. The Special DePutY 4. The Tahsildar' Man 5. One CC to SRI S 6. One CC to SRI SRI Tribal Welf are DePartm Government and Proiect ilabad Collectcr (T'W')' Utnoor' A.dilabad District' damarri N4andal' Manche rial District District REDDY Advocate [OPUCI ADVOCAT SURENDER NIVASA RAO BODDULURI E loPucl **-*-!-a:-rrYt?-- -f'..n - 7 Two CCs to Gp FOR SOCIAL WELFARE ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] Two CD Co:ies B KKS GJ $ HIGH COUTIT DATED:23lll6l2025 \ ORDER WP.No.20018 of 2024 07 0[T 2q5 '.rr 1 - .-. -.. -.-.-::.- DISPOSTNG 'THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \ f\c) cL/