Smt. Satram Setty lndira Rani v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed th6rewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in lhe nature of Writ of lvlandamus by declaring the action of the respondent No. 5 and his sub-ordinates in interfering and demolishing the compound wall of the petitioner in respect of his Plot No. 560, Block A, in Sy. No- 135 pa(, situated at Block - A, Gowthami Nagar, Edulanagualapally Village, Ramachandrapuram Irr'landal, Sangareddy District and threatening to dispossess the petitioner from his plot, without issuing any notice or without following due process of law, is illegal, arbitrary, violative or Articles 14, 21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent No.5 and his sub-ordinates not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of his prot N r 560, Brock A, in sy. No. 135 part, situated af Block A, Gowlhami Nagar, Edrrl lnagulapally village, Ramchandrapuram lMandal, Sangareddy District, without foltr wing due process of law and without issuing any notice. IA NO 10F 20 21 Petition under section rst cpc praying that in the circ rmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support 6f the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.5 and his sub_ordinates not :( interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of his plot No. 560, )lock A, in. Sy. No. 135 part, situated at Block-A, Gowthami Nagar, Edulirr agulapally Village, Ramchandrapuram Mandal, Sarfgareddy District, without foll> vtng due process of law and without issuing any notice. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI C.VTSWANATH . Counsel for Respondents No.1,3,4&5: SRI H.RAKESH KUMAR, AC p FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.2&6 : Gp FOR MA & UD The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL ORDER: PE TITIO NNo .26742o F2 027 This Writ petition is filed, under Ardcle 226 of Constitution of India, seeking the following relief ,,... lo issue on aD " " r i.- ".,i)' '' no'unoft *"' po rtica to rtg-i,;e in",i!!':o""'t .writ' order or direction more "J y:no'^"" ov a".Loir's '!" - !"^;"trX?ii,t"??#':,:*inte4ealf, anao.^:;Wr;!: ej."t i." ii\a7,"";5:"::::"r.in rewect of his ptot No.s6o, !!s",. ea,i,.,i,ii"Ji,i, ",!:,?::1 at Btock-a, coutthami """ec' Kar achnn6lTspllro. tvtal?al, Songoreddr.t Di d .threatening to dr'spossess rhe pe.titioner frim il"- i,J,'."',1f,',"n iss,uing ang notice or uithout rottowtng due proces.* ^y,i::t'l -z i "", i " r7 r,' X* ^ r'",,, !!. 21, : 1.1b it.ra ru, u i o tct t iue o r e rt t c t e s t t uJ trte t onstitulion of Ind.ia and consequentlg air".t-inf,"," not to interfii ;;;;;;;:Y':o-9"' No'.S and his Jub-ordinates nis ptot li.iio.*ii.i'n''ol?tttsston of the petitioner it nz:y;;!:i;::*iri!.:::i:ii-ivi:":fr i{;ffi t au, a nd * ii,i nZ,i,' ii I i ii"::;, I : :!":: !;:,X, : 2. Heard Sri C.Visr.i.anath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri H.Rakesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5 and perused p roce s s or " " n, o the record.

3. Sri C.Viswanath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that at the stage of admission, this court has passed an interim order, dated 29 . lO.2O2I directing the officiai I ! : : o .l rcspondents not to interfere with the possession o[ the petltloner ln respect of the subject property, except in acco 1 ance with the by law. Since [hen ar < till now, the procedure established petitioner is in peaceful possession and no ncr ces have been issued by the olficial respondents and that itsell r ould infer that the petitioner is in peaceful possession and she is l aving valid title and sale deed. Hence seeks to allow the present u r t pelition'

4. On the other hand, Iearned Assistant Goverrt nent Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondent Nos 1, 3, 4 an'1 5 rvould submit that this court has passed only interim order' n the guise of interim order, the petitioner is in illegal possess ' n \L'ithoul there being any title and registered sale deed He u'ou r lurther submit that the respondents are not contemplating a r y illegal action without following due process of law'

5. Recording the submission made by both th3 ernd upon the perusing the material available on - learned counsel cord, this Court is of opinion that since the learned Assistant Gc r rrnmenI Pleader stated that without fotlowing due process of lau-' the respondents are not going to take any action, the cause in petition does not survives and accordingly, this disposed of directing the respondents not to - ,he present writ wril petition is sort any action - I t 3 withou t follorving due process of lau,. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// .SREENIVASA REDDY SISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, 1 The Special Chief Secretary to Govt, Revenue lelangana, BRK Bhavan, T.S. Secretariat, Hyd rtment, State of vr iv vv vvPC

2. The The Principal Secretary to Govt, MA and UD Deparlment, State of Telangana, T.S. Secretaria(. Hva"iaoaa

3. The District Collector, Sangareddy District at Sangareddy. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy District at Sangareddy. 5. The Tahsildar, Ramchandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District. 6. T]rc"conTnissioner, Tellapur Munrcipality, Tellapur, Sangareddy District. 7. OneCC to SRt C.V|SWANATH, Advocate. [OpUC] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana. I

9. Two CCs to Gp for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, High Court for the State of Tetahgana at HVOeiaOaO. tO-U"fi '

10. Two CD Copies. BSK PMK HIGH COURT DATED:1310812025 ORDER WP.No.26742 of 2021 t i L:-i 20fr DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 4 (A LA