'I . Kodam Anjaneyulu v. The State of Telangana

Adamala Sridhar Reddy, S/o pratap Reddy Aged 45 years, Occ. Business, No 7 -29, Thangallapalli village and lvlandal, Rajanna Sircilla District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order, direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of official respondent no.3 in according building permission to un-official respondent for construction of building in petitioners land in H.NO.6-4414, ad-measuring an extent of 308 sq.yards situated at Thangallapalli village and Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District vide proceedings no. 304/BP/2023, dt 1710512023 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently quash the proceedings lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 1si cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, ihe Hign court may be pleased be pleased to suspend the buirding permission proc-eedings no. 3oqapno2g dr 1710512023 passed by respondent no.3 according permisiion to respondent no.4 for construction of building in petitioners land iri u.tto.o-++ln, aa measuring an extent of 308 sq.yards situated -al Thangallapalli village and Mandal, nr15nn, Sircilla District pending disposal of the above writ lA NO: 2 OF 202 3 Petition under section i 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, ft,e riigr, court may o" pi"ur"o- u" pleased to direct the respondent no.3 to stop the "ornrenc"r"nt of any construction activity by respondent no.4 in H.No.6-4414, ad-measuring an exteni of 308 sq.yards situated at rhangallapalli village and Mandal, Rajanna s"ircitta oistiict basing on the buirding permission proceetings no. 3o4rBp i2o23 dt 1rto5r2o23 pending disposal of the above writ IA NO: 1 OF 202s Between: Adamala Sridhar Reddv. S/o pratap Reddy Aged 45 years, Occ. Business, Rlo 7 _29, Thangattapatti viilage and lrlta hda t.'nalannb Sircitta bi=jii"t. AND ...pETtTtONER/RESpONDENT No.4 1 2 Kodam Anjaneyulu, S/o.Chinna Venkatesham, Aged about 57 years, Occ Business Kodam Ramesh, S/o.Chinna Venkatesham, Aged about 54 years, Occ Business. (Both are Rr/o.Thangailapaili viilage and Mandar, Rajanna sirciila District) . Il:^SjI:^qf IglSlgllq, Rep. by its principat Secretary, panchayath Raj 4. The District Panchayath Officer, Rajanna Sircilla District. 5. The Panchayath Secretary, Thangallapalli Village and tr,4andal, Rajanna uepanment, Secretariat, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONERS Sircilla District. ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3 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 vacate Interim Orderdt: 10.08.2023 in Writ petition No 21570 of 2023 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. P RAVI KIRAN Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: Gp FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.2&3: SRI p. KISHORE RAO SC FOR Gp Mp Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI P. GlRl KRISHNA The Court made the following: ORDER a') TI{E HONOURABLE SMT..IUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO.2T57O OF 2023 ORDER In this Writ l)etition, the petitioners are seeking a declaration that the action of the 3'd respondent in according building ltermission to thc unofficial respondent for construction of buitding in the petitioners' land in H.No.6-44lA adnreasuring 308 square yards situated at Thangallapalli Villagc and Mandal, Rajanr.ra Sircilla District vrde proccedings No.304/BP/2023 d1.17.05.2023, is illegal and arbitrary and consequently to set aside the same and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition alc that the petitionels claim to be owners of the subject plot. It is sl.ated that the subject plot was purchased by the petitioners' father from one Kodarn Chennappagari l{anumanthu on 01.03.1980 and he was also declared as its owner and possessor vide judgment and decree ir-r O.S.No.809 of 1992 on the file of the Court of District Munisifi Sircilla. It is stated that thereafter, the father of the petitioners applied for permission for construction and permission was accorded on

07.11.1992 and he also made construction. Thereafter, the petitioners' 4A W.P.No.2l570 of 2023 2 father died intestate on o2.o4.rg9g and the petitioners being one of the legal heirs have inherited the property and all the legal heirs are in possession of the property. It is submitted that while the matters stood thus, the unofficial respondent has fired o.s.No.l57 of 20z0on the file of the Junior civil Judge, sircilla claiming to be owner of the property and seeking injunction against the petitioners herein. It is stated that thereafter, the unofficial respondent has applied for building permission and the same was granted and therefore, the petitioners have sought information under the fught to Information Act as to how building permission was granted to the unofficial respondent and it was informed that on the basis of the legal opinion obtained from Govemment Pleaders, the building permission has been granted to the unofficial respondent. Challenging the same, the present Writ petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is a decree in favour of the petitioners, father holding him to be the owner and possessor of the subject property and the said decree has not been set aside and on the basis of some opinion given by Government Pleaders, the respondent Gram panchayat has granted permission which is illegal and arbitrary. 1O W.P.No.2l570 of 2023 3

4. At the time of admission on 10.08.2023, this Court had granted interim direction to the 3'd respondent to forthwith stop construction activity, ilany, undertaken by the 4n respondent pursuant to the building permission dt.1 7 .O 5.2023

5. Respondents 3 and 4 have filed their counter affidavits along with stay vacate petition in I.A.No.1 of 2025 filed by the 4th respondent.

6. According to the counter of the 3'd respondent, thcy have obtained legal opinion ol Government Pleaders and on the basis of the legal opinion, the permission has beetr granted to the 4th respondent. 7 The 4th respondent has fited the counter affidavit claiming himself to be the owner of the subject property.

8. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the official respondents are requirccl to look into the documents of the applicant before taking a decision on the said application. They cannot take the opinion of Govemnrent Pleaders to \ come to the conclusion about the ownership or otherwise of the applicant over the subject property. The petitioners claim to be owners by virtue of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.809 of 1992 on the file I I W.P.No.2l570 of 2023 4 of the file of the District Munisiff, Sircilla and the respondents did not show that the said judgment and decree has been set aside by any of the \ higher forum. The other suit filed by the unofhcial respondent, i.e., O.S.No.157 of 2020 on the hle of the Junior Civil Judge, Sircilla is only for injunction and not for declaration of title. Therefore, the respondent authorities ought not to have relied upon the legal opinion of Government Pleaders to grant permission in favour of the 4th respondent. g. Therefore, the permission granted to the 4ft respondent is set aside and the ofhcial respondents are directed to reconsider the application ol the 4'h respondent independently in accordance with law and take a decision thereon and communicate the same to the applicant/4th respondent as well as the petitioners herein'

10. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ll. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition including I.A.No.1 of 2025 shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. T. TIRUMALA DEVI EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, 'l . The Principal Secretary, Panchayath Raj Depa(ment, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The District Panchayath Officer, Rajanna Sircilla District. 3. The Panchayath Secretary, Thangallapalli Village and Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District.

4. One CC to SRL P RAVI KIRAN Advocate IOPUC]

5. One CC to SRI P. KISHORE RAO SC FOR Gp Mp tOpUCl 6. One CC to SRI P. ctRI KRTSHNA Advocate tOpUCl 7. Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] Two CD Copies o KKS GJP /f D HIGH COURT DATED:1010412025 \ \ { i iL) a. iHE cT47 €. 2I APB Zoz5 , *F-o ASr, ! rC -.;-: (i ( 2 a I t ORDER WP.No.21570 of 2023 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS OA cr'e 6