'1 . Pagidiala Narsimulu v. '1 . The State of Telangana

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 .....RESPONDENTS .,1r pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly' lne in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the action of the resprlndent No.4 to 6 in harassing the petitioners by interfering in agriculture opera:ions of the land of the petitioners total extent Ac. 10 - 00 situated at in Survey No 176 at Sidloor paigah village, Vikarabad IVlandal, Vikarabad District, T.G. as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and u nconstitutio na l. Conseqr_ ently 'l ) to direct the 2ndrespondent to do enquiry against the respondent 5 and ai and their staff who are entertaining and involving in civil disputes at the inr;tigation of the 7th respondent regarding the Iand of the petitioners 2) to direcl. the respondent No. 4 to 6and their not to interfere in agriculture operations of the peditioners total extent Ac. 10-00 situated at in Survey No. 176 at Sidloor paigatr village, Vikarabad Mandal, Vikarabad District, T.G. f.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c roumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2ndrespondent to do enquiry against the responderrt 5 and 6 and their staff who are entertaining and involving in civil disputes al 1're instigation of the 7th respondent regarding the land of the petitioners forthwith. |.A.NO:2 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cirr;rmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 4 to 6 not to interfere in agricul:ure operations of the petitioners total extent Ac. 10-00 situated at in Survey No. 1i'6 at Sidloor paigah village, Vikarabad [\,4andal, Vikarabad District, T.G. forthwith CounseI for the Petitioner: Dr CHALLA SRINIVASA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6 : SRI M.SRINIVAS, AGp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.7 : - The Court made the following ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KT'MAR WRIT PE"IITION No.23618 of 2o.25, ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of respondent Nos.4 to 6 in harassing the petitioners by interfering in agriculture operations of the land of the petitioners to an extent of Ac. l0-OO guntas situated in Survey No. 176 at Sidloor Paigah village, Vikarabad Mandal, Vikarabad District. A consequential prayer is sought to direct respondent No.2 to conduct enquiry against respondent Nos.5 and 6 and their staff, who were involved in civil disputes at the instigation of respondent No.7 regarding the petitioners' land and to direct respondent Nos.4 to 6 and their staff not to interfere in the agriculture operations of the petitioners' land.

2. Since the petitioners have a common grievalce, they filed the present writ petition.

3. Sri M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home takes notice for respondent Nos. 1 to 6. Since no relief is sought against respondent No.7, notice to respondent No.7 is dispensed.

4. The facts of the case in brief are that in the year 1975, Government assigned the land to the father of the l.t petitioner 2 X{1 to an extent of Ac.5-O0 guntas, Ac.2-00 gr,rntas to the 2.d petitioner, Ac.1 20 guntas to the father of 3rd petitioner, Ac.1 2O guntas to the father-in-law of the 4th petitioner. ir Survey No.176 at Sidloor Paigah Village, Vikarabad Mandal arld District, Telalgala (herein after referred as subjecl. lands). It is submitted that while the petitioners are carrying their agricultural operations in their respective field:;, the respondent No.7 along with five unknown persons obstructt:cl the petitioners' operations stating that the subject land belonlJs; to them. It is further submitted that on 11.O7.2025, the r-r:spondent No.7 along with respondent Nos.S and 6 came to thr: 1;etitioners' field and ruined their Red Gram crop and threatened them. On

28.07 .2025, the respondent Nos.4 and 5 came 1.c the petitioners' field and stopped their agriculture operation s. It is further submitted that the respondent No.7 is a real estate person and belongs to Hyderabad and trying to grab the pe:trtioners' land in illegal marner with the help of police. Que:;tioning the said action, the present Writ Petition is hled

5. The learned Assistalt Government Pleader l-:r Home placed copy of instructions submitted by the Sub-Ins;Jrector of Police, Vikarabad Town PS, Vikarabad District - responclent No.6 before this Court stating the respondent No.7 has loclged a complaint on 11.O7.2025 with the respondent No.4 agains,t the petitioners. .,/ Pursuant to the said complaint, GD entry was made and enquiry 3 is conducted. On 11.O7.2024, the respondent No.4 has personally visited the said property for the purpose of enquiry. It is further submitted that the respondent Police neither interfered nor stopped the petitioners from their agricultural operations During the course of enquiry, the respondent No.4 also issued notice under Section 94 BNSS to respondent No.7 on 11.O7.2025 to provide relevant documents and the respondent No.7 has submitted certain documents before the Enquiry Officer. During the course of enquiry, the respondents Police except conducting the enquiry, had neither interfered into the civil disputes ( \" between the petitioners and the respondent No.7 in any manner at any point of time nor taken any coercive steps against him ald eventually prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition and ft-rrther submits that the respondent Police will not interfere in the petitioners' agricultural land.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 7 . Recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and with the above observations arrd with consent, tllis Writ Petition stands disposed of directing the respondent Nos.2 to 6 not to interfere in the subject lands ,i.1 \' ..'li:. \{a*& ._.rx&' \ 4 without following due procedure as contemplaterc. under law. No order as to costs

8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the title and possession of the pr:1.'.tioners on the subject lalds and if the respondents intend to tarke appropriate action / steps on the subject lalds, they sha_li follow due process of lar,r, As a sequel, miscellaneous applications ltending in this petition, if any, sha1l stand closed. //TRUE COPY// \/I JAWAHAR REDDY hTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER , Sitate of Telangana To SA LS

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secre at Hyderabad.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Vikarabad District at Vikarzrbad town, Vikarabad District, T.G.

3. The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Vikarabad, at Vikarabarl town, Vikarabad

4. The SHO, Vikarabad Police Station, at Vikarabad town, V'karabad District, District, T.G. T.G. District, T.G.

5. Bheem Kumar, lnspector of Police Vikarabad Police staticn, Vikarabad 6. Giri, Sub lnspector, Vikarabad Police station, Vikarabad t)istrict, T.G. 7. Ramakrishna, R/o. Hyderabad, Telangana State. 8. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State o'-l'elangana at 9. One CC to DR CHALLA SRINIVASA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 1 0. Two CD Copies w Hyderabad. [OUT] HIGH COURT DATED:1 110812025 ( -:""\\ - l_- rl-. ,,.. ? :} SEP 2025 1, " '.1 ir.r,.'i ili'' ORDER WP.No.23618 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. R coY e-A \3 .*c*,