Contempt Case No. 1588 of 2024 · The High Court · 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 amend the cause title of the 8th petitioner as Tatavarthi Srinivasa Rao, Sio. Sri. Venkata Subba Rao, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Pvt..Employee, Fyo.20'2'1711 , Pamur Road, Kandukur, Prakasham District. A.P. - 523105, instead of Gurram Venkataramanaiah, S/o. Gurram Venkateshwarlu, Aged about 58 years, Occ. Business, R/o. 3-163, Near Kandukur Road Center, Singarayakonda, Prakasham District, Andhra Pradesh - 523101 in W.P.No.'18828 OF 2024 in the interest of justice. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 receive the additional affidavit by considering of the above mentioned facts which shall part and parcel of the main writ affidavit in the writ petition and in the circumstances of the case the 4th respondent interference is illegal and against Article 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 direct the respondent authorities more specifically Respondent No 5 to 6 authority to not to interfere to the physical possession of the petitioner to the petition scheduled properties from 1 to 12 properties mentioned above vide documents No. 13130/2023, dl. 17.5.2023, No.1288712023, dt.15.05.2023, No.'13131/2023, dt.17.5.2023, No.13128t2O23, d1.17.05.2023, No.13129/2023, dt.17.O5.2023, agreement of sale-cum-GPA with possession document No.1313712023' dt.17.05.2023, No.13135/2023, d1.17.O5.2023, No.13139/2023' dt.17.O5.2023' 13134t2023, d1.17.05.2023. No.13138/2023, d1,17.05,2023' No 1917812023' dt,14.O7.2023. No.19187/2023 , dt.'\4.7 .2023 and Sale Deed No'2109212018' dt.20.09.2018, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. lA NO:4 OF 2024 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Department, Hyderabad Principal Secretary, Revenue

2. The District Collector, Medchal-lvlalkajgiri Keesara, Medchal-Malkajgiri District - 501301 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Malkajgiri Medchal-Malkajgiri District-500094 District, Office at Near ORR Division, Office at Sainikpuri,

4. The Tahsildar, Dundigal Mandal Office Diskict- 500055 at Dundigal Medchal-Malkajgiri

5. The Revenue lnspector, Malkajgiri District -500055 Dundigal Mandel Office at Dundigal , Medchal- ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS No.1 to4 AND 1 Thatavarthi Jhansi Laxmi, Wo Sri Srinivas Rao Aged about 49 years, Occ. House wife No 20 -2 -1711, Pamur Road , Kandukur Road Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh - 523105

2. Gurram Venkataramanaiah, Sio Gurram Venkateshwarlu years, Occ, Business Rl/o 3-163, Near Kandukur Singarayakonda Prakasham District Andhra Pradesh -523101 Aged about 58 Road Center

3. Gurram Njlmqla Devi, Wo. Gurram Singaiah Aged about 62 years Occ. Kandukur, House Wife No 13-1-22,Pedda Bazaai, Beside Ramalayam Prakasam District Andhra Pradesh - 523105 '

4. Thatavarthi V.N.S.G.S. Pavan Kalyan, S/o Srinivas Rao Aged about 22 years, Occ. Student No 2-02-11711, Pamoor Road Kandukur Prakasham District, Andhra Pradesh -523105

5. Thatavarthi Akstlay Shanti Swaroop, S/o Srinivas Rao Aged about 22 years, Occ. Business No. 2-02-11711, Pamoor Road Kandukur-Prakasham Dlstrict, Andhra Pradesh - 523105

6. Chinni Anitha Lakshmi Kalpana, D/o. Mallikarjuna Rao Aged about 34 years Occ. House wife Rl/o Flat No.9, Sudha Residency, 1/3 Kortipaddu Ram-anna Peta, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh - 522007 7 Gqrya4 Singaiah, S/o G.Lingam Aged about 65 years Occ. Business R/o 13- 1-22, Pedda Pedda Bazzar Beside Ramalayam Kandukur Prakasam District 523105 B. Tatavarthi Srinivasa Rao,, S/o Sri. Venkata Subba Rao, Aqed about 52 vears. Occ. Pvt. Employee No 20-2-17t1 , Pamur Road, KarJdukur, Prakdsham District, A.P. 523105. Petitioner No. 8 is amended as per C.O.dt. 13.08.2024 in lA No. 312024. 9. Eqs|rqvqrqra Rao, S/o Gurram Singaiah Aged about 37 years, Occ. Business No 13-1-22, Pedda Bazaar, Beside Ramalayam Kanduklr, Prakasam District Andhra Pradesh -523105 l0.Nagullapally V.V. Satyanarayana, S/o Satyanaryana Aged about 40 years, Occ. Business No 4-32-124112193, ptot'No. 0a Dha-rani tr,tagar eitywyri Colony, Kukutpally, Hyderabad '1 1.Kawa Bharathi, Wo K. Ramreddy Aged abount 74 years, Occ. House wife 2-22-22313, -{Cyq Nagar Opp Abhiram Nitayam !o Kukutpally, Hyderabad.500072 ...RESPONDENTS/WRIT PETITIONERS 12. Dundigal ltilunicipality, Office at Dundigal Medchal-Malkajgiri District - S00OS5 Rep. by its Commissioner ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 the interim Order granted on 18.01 .2024 in W.p.No..l8828 of 2024 and dismiss the Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt PILLI NAGARAJ counsel for the Respondents No.1to' , HJr=.[rri%iHEIr?T,r= counser ror the Respondents No.6 'SS'I"tTl,fffii#lfi+EDDy, C.C.No.1588 OF 2024 Contempt Case under Sections 10 lo 12 OF Contempt Of Courts Act To Punish The Respondents Herein For Willfully Violating The Orders Of The High Court in l.A. No. 01 OF 2024 in W.P. No. 1BB2B|2O24 dated 1BlOtt2O24. Between:

1. Thatavarthi Jhansi Laxmi, Wlo Sri Srinivas Rao Aged about 49 years, Occ. House wife Rlo 20 -2 -1711, Pamur Road, Kandukui Road prakas-am District, Andhra Pradesh 523105

2. Gurram Venkataramanaiah, S/o Gurram Venkateshwarlu Aged about 5g years, Occ. Business Rl/o 3-163, Near Kandukur Road Center Singarayakonda , Prakasham District Andhra Pradesh -523101

3. Gurram Nirmala Devi, W/o. Gurram Singaiah Aged about 62 years Occ. House Wife No 13-1-22,Pedda Bazaai, Besid-e Ramalayam 'Kandukur, Prakasam District Andhra Pradesh 523105

4. Thatavarthi V.N.S.G.S. Pavan Kalyan, S/o Srinivas Rao Aged about 22 years, Occ. Student No 2-02-11711, Pamoor Road Kandukur Prakasham District, Andhra Pradesh -523105

5. Thatalarthi Akslgy Shanti Swaroop, S/o Srinivas Rao Aged about 22 years, Occ. Business P.Jo. 2-02-117 h, Pamoor Road KandukurPrakasham District, Andhra Pradesh 523105

6. Chinni Anitha Lakshmi Kalpana, D/o. Mallikariuna Rao Aqed about 34 vears Occ. House wife Fi/o Flat No.9, Sudha Residi-'ncy, 1i3 Kdrtipaddu Ramanna Peta, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh - 522007

7. Gurram Singaiah, S/o G.Lingam Aged about 65 years, Occ. Business Fi/o 13- -Kandukur prakasam District, 1-22, Pedda Pedda Bazzar Beside Ramalayam Andhra Pradesh 523105 B. Tatavarthi Srinivasa Rao, S/o Sri Venkata Subba Rao, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Private Employee No 20-2-1711, Pamur Road, Kandukur, Prakasham District, Andhra Pradesh 523105. impleaded (in place of Gurram (Petitioner No.8 V.;ili;;.".aia-rr)-petitionJi N;.41" wp) is pei the Hon'ble Court order d1d.12.08.2l24 in lA No.1/2024 in CC No.1588/2024).

9. Raohavendra Rao, S/o Gurram Singaiah Aged about 37 years, Occ' Business - Wd ll-l -zZ, Pedda Bazaar, Beside Ramalayam Kandukur, Prakasam District Andhra Pradesh 523105

10. Nagullapally V.V. Satyanarayana, S/o Satya.narya-na Aged about 40^ years' oc6. Blsiriess No 432-124112193, Plol No. 93 Dharani Nagar Allywyn Colony, Kukutpally, HYderabad.

11. Kawa Bharathi, W/o K. Ramreddy Aged abount 74 years, Occ. House wife No 2-22-223t3, Jaya Nagar Opp. Abhiram Nilayam Kukutpally, Hyderabad - 500072 ...PETITIONERS AND 1 Prashanth Reddy, Revenue lnspector Dundigal Mandal Office at Dundigal , It/edchal-Malkajgiri District 500055 Avinash, Deputy Tahsildar, Dundigal Ma1!al. Office at Dundigal, Gandimaisamma - Dundigal Medchal-Malkajgiri District 500055 Sved Matheen, Tahsildar, Dundigal Mandal Office at Dundigal' G-andimaisamma - Dundigal Medchal-Malkajgiri District 500055 2 3 Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI PILLI NAGARAJ Counsel for the Respondents: Ms.TEKURU SWETCH, ASST.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER ...CONTEMNORS HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAI\I WRIT PETITION No.1EE28 OF 2024 ALONG WITH CONTEMPT CASE No.l588 OF 2024 COMMON ORDER Heard Mr. Pilli Nagaraj, Ieamed counsel for the petitioners, Ms' Tekuru Swetcha, leamed Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behall of respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Mr- Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.6.

2. The present writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents, more particularly, respondent Nos.5 and 6 in interfering with the physical possession of the petitioners in respect of the properties mentioned therein and making attempts to stop the construction work thereon, as illegal and arbitrary.

3. Whereas, Contempt Case is filed alleging willlul and deliberate violation of the order dated I8.07.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No. 18828 of 2024. W.P. No.18828 OF 2024

4. CASE OF THE PETITONERS: i) The petitioners are I 1 in number. They are claiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors of their respective ] 2 KL.J w P. No l8E2E o12024 & CCI No.l588 of2024 Foundation Stage Villas, Phase-III in Survey No.170/5 of Bhavana's GLC Cribs, situated at Mallampet Village, Dundigal Gandimaisamma Mandal under Dundigal Municipality, Medchal - Malkajgiri District, on the strength of various registered Sale Deeds/Agreements of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney with possession, the details of which are mentioned hereunder: Name of owner Petitioner No.l &2 Petitioner No.l & 5 PetitionerNo.l &6 Petitioner No.l & 6 Pctitioner No-2 & 8 Pctitioner No.3 & 4 Petitioner No.3 & 4 Petitioner No.3 & 5 Petitioner No.4 & 9 Petitioner No.5 & 7 Petitioner No.l0 I'etitione r No.l I Extent in sq. yds. Villa No. l4A 154 74, 163 6A 164 8A 165 16A r0A t2A. 8A 2A 5A 4A l1 150 r83 200 165 159 t54 160 150 Plinth Area in sq.ft. 2l 89.50 1 100 (G+1) 2389.60 (G+l) 2l 00.91 2244.18 2489.82 2817.04 2100.91 2244.18 2244.18 1800.00 1800.00 Salc Deed/AGPA No & Date 13130/23 & 17 .05.23 12887123 & 15.05.23 t3t3U23 & 17.05.23 13128/23 & 17.05.23 13129t23 & 0.05.23 13137t23 &.17.0s.23 t3135123 &. t7.O5.23 13t39123 & 17.05.23 13t34123 & t7 .05.23 13138/23 & t7.05.23 19t18/23 & 14.07.23 19t81/23 & 14.07.23 ii) The petitioners herein purchased the aforesaid Villas from M/s, Lakshmi Srinivasa Constructions, represented by its Managing Partner, Mrs. Gurram Vijaya Lakshmi, The said Firm purchased the land under a registered sale deed bearing document No.2 1092 of 201 8 and converted the same into plots having obtained an approved layout permit dated 04.05.2023 from respondent No.6 Municipality. l KL.J W P. No ltE2E ot2024 & (l( No.l58Eo12024 iii) While the petitioners are proceeding with construction works on the aforesaid Villas, the officials of respondent No.6 are interfering with their construction work and also attempted to stop the work. iv) On 09.07 .2024 at about I 1 .00 A.M., respondent No.5 along with field staff of respondent No.6 came to the site and threatened the workers on the pretext of registering criminal cases. v) The petitioners are proceeding with construction strictly in accordance with the building permit orders. Therefore, the acts of respondents, more particularly, respondent Nos.5 and 6, in interfering with the construction activities of the petitioners is illegal and arbitrary.

5. CONTENTIONS OF R EVENU E AUTHORITIES: i) The petitioners stated to have purchased the plots in Survey No. 170/5 of Mallampet Village and obtained layout permission' whereas they encroached into Government land in Survey No'170/1 to an extent of Ac.0.25 guntas of Mallampet Village, classified as I I I 4 KL.J wP No 181i28 oil024 E: CC No. t588 of2021 'Gairan Sarkari' and illegally constructing some basenlents and in some plots pillars were raised partly. ii) As per revenue records, the total extent of Acs.44.0g guntas in Survey No. I 7011 is Government land classified as , Gairan Sarkari ' . iii) The land in Survey No.l7015, admeasuring Acs.5.00 guntas is Government assigned land to ex-servicemen. The purchaser. of the land in Suruey No. 170/5, admeasuring Acs.5.00 gunras has illegally rnade layout including an extent ol Ac.0.25 guntas 01. land in Survey No. 170/l and sold ro various persons illegalll, including the petitioners herein iu) The Revenue Authorities are not interl'ering with the constructions made in Survey No. 170/5. As the petitioners are indulging in illegal constructions over the Govemment lanrl in Survey No. 17011, to protect the same fiom any illegal encroachrnents, stopped the illegal constructions and the same were removed. v) A cornplaint was also lodged with Dundigal police and the same was registered as a case in Crime No.647 ol 2024,, dated 05.08.2l24under Section s - 329 G).324 (4),324(5) and 303 (2) of ) ! 5 KL.J W P. No 18628 ot2024 & CC No'1588 of 2024 the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ,2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section - 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act' 1984 (for short 'PDPP Act') against Mrs' Vijaya Lakshmi and her henchmen' Investigation is Pending. vi) Pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court' subiect Iand got surveyed ort 19.10.2024 by the Mandal Surveyor by putting the petitioners on notice, wherein it is found that an extent of Ac'0'24 guntas claimed by the petitioners in Survey No' I 70/5 falls in the Govemment land in Survey No 1 70/ I ' vii) While processing the apptication for conversion of land in Survey No. 170/5, admeasuring Ac'5'00 guntas in favour of M/s' 'on LakshmiSrinivasaConstructions,thefieldstaffreportedthat verification of physical possession' the petitioners' land is covered with structures. The same was converted into NALA' Thus' the land which is claimed by the petitioners is already covered by structures' Now, the petitioners are claiming the open land in Sur"vey No'170/l which is a Govemment land'

6.withtheaforesaidsubmissions,theysoughttodismissthe present writ Petition /' 6 KL,.I W.P. No.18828 of2024 & CC No li88 of2024 C.C. No.1588 OR 2024:

7. When the aforesaid writ petition came up lor hearing, this Court granted the lollowing interim order on 18.07.2024: "At request of leamed Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri. B.Jagan Madhav Rao, leamed Standing Counsel appearing lor respondent No.6, to get instructions, list on

23.07 .2024 after fresh matters. 'fill then, respondent Nos.5 and 6 are directed not to dispossess the petitioners/demolish the structures from the subject property." i) Vide order dated 25 .07 .2024, the aforesaid interim order was extended till 1 3.08.2024. ii) The petitioners filed the present Contempt against respondent Nos.4 and 5 the Tahsildar and Revenue Inspector, respectively and also the Deputy Tahsildar ol Dundigal Gandimaisamma Mandal, alleging willful and deliberate violation of the aforesaid order contending that during subsistence of the aforesaid interim order, on 06.08.2024 at about 9.30 A.M., respondent No.5 in the writ petition and respondent No.2 in the conternpt case i.e., Deputy Tahsildar alleged to have instructed by respondent No.4 - Tahsildar came to the subject properties with Police aid and demolished the r"- 7 KL,J W P. No.18828 of2024 & CC No l588 of2024 structures under construction with the help of JCB causing monetary loss of more than Rs.40.00 lakhs to the petitioners and thereby, the respondents disobeyed the aforesaid interim orders passed by this Court. Thus, the respondents in the contempt case are liable to be punished

8. Respondent No.3 - Tahsildar filed the counter contending that since the petitioners encroached into the Govemment land in Surwey No. I 70/l , started construction, its field staff stoped the same over the Govemment land, demolished the constructed stmctures partly and informed them that the land wherein they are making construction is govemment land in Survey No.170/1 and not in Survey No.170/5 as claimed by them. The respondents being the revenue officials, their primary duty is to protect the valuable government lands from illegal encroachments. However, these respondents did not touch and interfere with any construction made in the subject land of the petitioners in Survey No. 1 7015 . i) The respondents have great respect to the orders of Court and they never disobeyed the orders willfully or deliberately as alleged by the petitioners. t, 8 KL.J WP No.18828 of2024 & CC No.l588 of2024 ii) Even if this Court comes to a conclusion that the respondents disobeyed the orders, they tendered their unconditional apology to this Court and requested to close the contempt case. FINDTNG AND ANALYSIS OF THE COURT

9. Thus, aforesaid rival submissions would reveal that the petitioners are claiming that they have purchased the aforesaid villas under the aforesaid registered sale deeds. The same are in Sy.No.l7015 of Mallarnpet Village. They purchased the said Villas from M/s Lakshmi Srinivasa Constructions. The said finn purchased the plots under the registered sale deed bearing document No.21092 of 2018, dated 20.09.2018, obtained conversion proceedings and also approved lay out permit dated 04.05.2023 from 6,r, respondent _ Municipality and deveroped the same into plots. It has constructed the Villas. According to the petitioners, respondent Nos.5 and 6 interfered with the said construction and threatened the petitioners to stop construction without following due procedure laid down under law.

10. According to respondents, the land ln Sy.No.170/1 of Mallampet Village admEasuring Ac.44.0g guntas is classified as 9 KI,J w.P. No.18828 of2024 & CC No 1588 of202l 'Gairan Sarkari'which is govemment land. The land in Sy.No.170/5 admeasuring Ac.5.00 guntas is govemment land. The sarne was assigned to ex-servicemen. The purchaser of the said land is illegatly made lay out including an extent of Ac.0.25 guntas of land in Sy.No. I70l1, sold to various persons illegally including the petitioners herein. The said purchase of the land by vendor of the petitioners i.e. M/s Laskshmi Srinivasa Constructions is in violation of the assignrnent rules. I l. Though the petitioners vendor obtained approved lay out permit dated 04.05.2023 from 6'r' respondent- Municipality in respect of land in Sy.No.170/5, it has startcd construction by encroaching into govemment land to an extent of Ac.0.25 guntas in Sy.No. I 7011. Thereflore, respondents informed the petitioners and its vendor to stop construction. On the complaint todged by 5'h respondent, Police Dundigal Police Station, registered a case in Cr.No.647 of 2024 on

05.08.2024 against the Proprietor of the vendor of the petitioners and others for the offences punishable under Sections - 329 (3),324 (4), 324 (5) and 303 (2) of the BNS and Section - 3 of the PDPP Act. The lnvestigation in the said crime is pending. l0 KI,.J q'P No 18E28 of 102.t & CC No 1588 of2024

12. On consideration of the said aspects, more pafticularly, considering the fact that there is dispute with regard to i<lentification of property, vide order dated 06.09.2024, this Court directed 4th respondent to conduct survey and demarcate the propert) belongs to the petitioners in Sy.No. 170/5 and the land in Sy.No.170/1, the Govemment land, situated at Mallampet Village, fix boundaries by putting the petitioners and all interested parties on notice and alfording them an opportunity, and file report.

13. According to respondent Nos.5 and 6, in cornpliance with the said order, they got the said land surveyed on 19.10.2024 by the Mandal Surveyor by putting the petitioners on notice. af'fording them an opportunity and found that the land admeasuring Ac.0.25 guntas claimed by the petitioners in Sy.No.l7015, Villas in Sy.No. 170/l of Mallampet Village which is governmenr land. Thus, the vendor of the petitioners obtained conversion proceedings, lay out pcrmit dated

04.05.2023 illegally and started construction by encroaching into the govemment land.

14. Sri Pilli Nagaraj, learned counsel for the pctitioners would contend that pursuant to the notice issued by the Mandal Surveyor, he was present on the spot along with some of the petitioners. He has a,. KL.J u.P No 1882t of 2024 &CC No I5tE of 2024 submitted objections. The same were not considered. Thereafter, the Mandal Surveyor informed that the survey is postponed and he will inform the next date in due course. He has not informed next date ol survey. Without conducting survey, respondents have demolished structures in violation of the orders dated I 8.07.2024, 25.07 .2024 and

06.08.2024. They have violated the said order willfully and detiberately. In proofofthe same, he has filed a copy of the objections and photographs. On the other hand, the respondents have filed proceedings including notice issued to the petitioners and panchanama etc. Perusal of the same would reveal that Sri Pilti Nagaraju, learned counsel for the petitioners signed on the notice and filed objections'

15. The aforesaid f'acts would reveal that there is dispute with regard to identification of the property. The petitioners and their vendor are claiming that they are proceedings with construction in the land in Sy.No.170/1 pursuant to approved layout dated 04'05'2023 approved by 6'h respondent and according to respondents' the petitioners and their vendor are proceeding with the construction by encroaching into the. Govemment land to the extent of Ac.0'25 guntas in Sy.No.170/1. Therefore, respondent Nos.5 and 6 have to conduct survey, demarcate the land in Sy.Nos.170 ll and 17015 of Mallampet - t2 KL,J \\' P No 18828 of2021& CC No 1588 ol ]021 Village, strictly in accordance with law by putting the petitioners, all interested parties on notice and affording them an opportunity. On demarcation of the same, the petitioners and their vendor proceed with the construction pursuant to approved layout permit dated 04.05.2023, they can as well claim damages etc., from their vendor i.e. M/s Lakshmi Srinivasa Constructions, for selling the aforesaid Villas and making construction by encroaching into the govemment land in Sy.No.170/l of Mallampet Village. On cornpletion of survey, and if report says that there is no encroachment, they can proceed with the construction and claim damages from authorities concemed.

16. It is the specific contention of the respondents C.C.No.1588 of 2024 that being surveyor and Tahsildar, It is their duty to protect the govemment land. They have informed the petitioners and their vendor who started making construction in the land in Sy.No. 170/1 which is a govemment land. Thel, have ro protect the government land. The said fact was informed to the petitioners and their vendor and requested them to stop construction. Even then, they have proceeded with the construction by encroaching into the government land. Therefore, they have demolished the structures partly to protect the government land. l3 Kl l W P No.l882E of2024 & CC No.l58t of2024

17. It is also their specific contention that the suryey was conducted on 19.10.2024 ahd found that the petitioners are proceeding with construction by encroaching into Ac.0.25 guntas of land in Sy.No.l7011 of Mallampet Village, which is govemment land' Therefore, they have not committed any violation much less willful and deliberate violation of the aforesaid orders, dated 18.07.2024 and

25.07.2024.

18. On coming to know that the petitioners and their vendor are proceeding with the construction in the land in Sy'No' 170/1 of Mallampet Viltage which is government land, respondents should have sought clarification fiom this Court' Instead ol doing so' they have demolished the structures partly on the ground that the petitioners and their vendor are proceeding with the construction in govemment land. At the same time, when there is dispute with regard to identification of the subject propefty, the petitioners should have waited till the said dispute is resolved' Instead, they have proceeded with the construction. It is the specific contention of respondent Nos'5 and 6 that despite specific request, the petitioners and their vendor proceeded with the construction by encroaching into the govemment land. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no l4 Lt i W l, No lliS2lt ol 1021&CCNol588of2024 r willful and deliberate violation of the aforesaid order by respondents. However, conducting survey and demarcating of the alore said land in Sy.No. 1 70ll and t70l5 of Mallampet village would to resolve the ISSUC

19. To punish the contemnors in terms of Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, there should be willful and deliberate violation of the order. As held by the Apex Court in Niaz Mohammad Vs. State of Haryanar and in Balwantbhai Somabhai Bhandari vs. Hiralal Somabhai Contractor (Deceased rep.by legal heirs2

20. In the light of the aforesaid discussion:- i. C.C.No.l588 of 2024 is closed. ii. W.P.No.18828 of 2024 is disposed of directing the respondent Nos.5 and 6 to conduct survey, demarcare tlte land in Sy.Nos. l70ll and 17015 of Mallampet Village. fjx boundaries strictly in accordance with law by putting the petitioners, all interested parties on notice and affording them an opportunity. They shall complete the said exercise within Six (6) weeks from ' (1994 6 SCC 332) ' judgment dated 06.09.2023 in Civil Appeal No.4955 <tf 2022 l5 KL,J W.P. No.18828 0f2024 & CC No 158t of2024 the date ofreceipt ofa copy ofthis order. Thereafter, subject to result of the survey, the petitioners and their vendor are at liberty to proceed with the construction in the land in Sy.No. 170/5 of Mallampet Village pursuant to approved lay out permit dated 04.05.2023 and claim damages against the erring officials.

111. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition and the contempt case, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/- M. MANJULA P TY REGISTRAR Hvderabad Medchal-Malkajgiri District-500094 Keesara, Medchal-Malkaiqiri District - 50130'1 CTION OFFICER '1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Telangana' , ft;'Di"ir-i,rt colector, Medchat_trilatkajgiri District, office at Near oRR O. f[e-nevenuJ Oivislonil"Otf-ic"r, Matt<algiri Division, Office at Sainikpuri, +. ii.l,r-'iir,iiroiij"ounOisii-tvr-anoat office at Dundigal Medchal-Malkajgiri s. itd H"venue lnspector, Dundigal Mandel Office at Dundigal ' Medchal- 6. t[i;'d".;;;[:iii^Jr,'irr"oisal Municipalitv, office at Dundisal Medchal- 7 on; db to snt PILLI NAGARAJ, Advocate, [oPUC] 8. i;; bcJto bp roa nevEruur, High cburt foi the state of Telangana. S. b;,,CC tO SRI KRISHNA REDDY PUTTA, SC FOR MUNICIPALITY/MC. I\Ialkaioiri District - 500055 tvlalkaioiri District -500055 District- 500055 rOUTI toPUCl

10.Two CD CoPies. BSK GJP ,l/ I To, HIGH COURT DATED:1410212025 I 1i\e s 14 I6: i l (( l 2 E npa ?i:?5 a,! t\1!o,s.,.,^ \ij--. - -,1r.-g '\- --::=:-;--;/ -.-1 ,.1,, i COMMON ORDER \ WP.No.18828 of 2024 ALONG WITH C.C.No.1588 OF 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION & CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE WITHOUT COSTS /? {.2 ls /s75