1. Malothu Ram Babu v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lnri : praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, n ( re particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of tl-r Respondents 3 to 7 in demolishing of the Petitioners houses as rllegal arbitrary, malafide, unconstitutional, in violation of principles of natural justic: and consequentially direct the Respondents not to interfere with the peace r I possession of the Petitioners' property and not to demolish the property of ti r Petitioners without following due process of Law lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the , ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Co I t may be pleased to direct the Respondents 3 to 7 not to demolish the subjeci )roperty and grant a stay of all further action by the Respondents pending the n[ in Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.S. PRASAD SENIOR COIJ {SEL REP SRI. SANJEEV REDDY GII..I ELA Counsel for the Respondents: SPECIAL GOVERNMENT Pr- :ADER SRI S. RAHUL REDDY, ADDL ADVOCATE GENERI L The Court made the following: ORDER t 'i a1S a HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 24198 OF 2024 ORDER: Pctitioners seek to declare the action of Respondents 3 to 7 in demolishing their houses as il1egal and arbitrary. Consequently, a direction is sought to respondents not to interlere with rhe peaceful possession of petitioners wrthout follou'ing due process of law.

2. The case of petitioncrs is that they all belong to Schccluled Tribe community and are absolute o\ /ners of the ir respectivc houses mer.rtioned in the cause title. The subject lands fall u,ithin the dehnition of Agency Land' which is not permitted to be transferred to any person other than a Schcduled Tribe. It is stated, pe[itioners purchased the sarne through sada sale deeds as is the custom followed in the area and their title is not disputed by any other Scheduled Caste or Schedulcd Tribe person. Their houses are assessed by property tax by the Panchayat olfice and petitioners have been residing in the subject propcrties for many years.

2.1 Wlrrle so, on the wee hours of OI-OS-ZOZ+, Respondents 3 to 7 arrived with JCB machines and commenced illegal demolition of petitloners' houses, without following due process of law. Petitioners assert that no notices regarding the !. t, I 2 subject property have been issued to them tr. C atc. Partial dcnrolition l-rzrd already becn carried ouL, spccif r ally affecting the tin sheds and petitioners could u,ard-olf the -cst rvith the frelp of thr-'ir ncighbours. The olficials Ieft t rc premise s thrcatening lo return wrthin a ferv hours with addi ional force to continue the illegal and arbitrary :molition.

3. Thc 2"d respondent filed counter st:i ing that onc Mr. Karri Koleswar Rao fited Writ Petition No. :

71.6 of 2Ol3 challenging (].O.Ms.No.13 datecl 15.O2.2013 rvl- :rein il tas ailcged that there are several ille gal sales r.r.r t r respecl to Acs. 14.O9 guntas in Survel, Nos. 1,18/3, 14811,1 +81s, r4816, 148 /7 , 148 / I ar.d 148 l9 of Chunchupalli Villagr,, and Mandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District (subject land). ln -he said Writ Pctition, this Court on 10.O I .2024 suo motu )r rpleaded the District Collector, Bhadradri Kothagudem as Re:j rondcnt No.5 and directed him to submit a detailed report of e 'ound reality and status of the above said land. Pursuant lo tl e said order, the District Collector obtained a comprehensive r,: rort lrom the District Panchayat Ofhcer, Bhadradri Kothaguder:r Inspector of Survey, Survey and Land Records and Tahsildar, )hunchupalli from which it was found that total 96 structurc r rvere raised u,ithout permission in the subject land. Thc Disl 'ict Collector submitted a detailed report with respect to fa. t ral posit ion, J entries in revenue records, structures raised without permission, officers responsible for the illegal structures raised.

3.1 It appears from the inspeclion and reports that one Mr. Molothu Srccnu executed various documents in favour of various peoplc who raised constructions in the subject land without obtaining pcrmission- This Court thereafter, uide order dated 15.07.2024 directed to submit an action taken report against the persons who viola[ed law by resorting lo illegal sales / construction in the subject land. Consequently, notices were issued to the alleged individuals to shou, cause as to why action should not be taken against them. Thereafter, the District Collector directcd Dislrict Panchayat Officer, Mandal Panchayat Ofhcer, Tahsildar, Chunchupalli, Station House Ofltcer, Chunchupalli to demolish the illegal constructions in the subject land.

3.2 [t is also stated that pursuant to the orders of this Court, certain illegal slructures (l room tikki structures) were demolished, hence, the present Writ Petition came to be liled. This Court on 02.0g.2024 directed respondents not to dispossess petrtioners from the subject property. On O5.O9.2024, this matter was directed to be listed along with Writ Petition No.5716 of 2013. While things stood thus, the unofhcial --'" 'l- i t ,fl 4 Respondenl in Writ Petition No. 5716 oi 20 t l i.e. Malothu Srcer-ru prel'erred Writ Appeal No.l057 of 2O24 agz u'rst the ordcr I datecl 15.Cr7.2O21 in W.P.No.57l6 of 2O13. rr I :rcin District Collcctor u,as clirectcd to submit action takcrt rcport. The Division Berrch direcled to maintain status quo \ ,itl-r regard to the structures in question uide order dated 0() O9.2O24 and steps are bcing taken to file vacate stay in thc WrjL Appea 1.

3.3 It is stated, the construction raised lt,, petitioners is u,ithout permission and the property tax receipl s iled by them do not confcr any ou.nership rights on the prope- ir:s and such rcceipts are issued after collecting user chargcs rs per Memo No.S12/CPR&RE/DIl2017, dated O3.O3.2Ol / only for providing basic amenitres. petitioners werc scrv( ( notices zrnd attion r.l,as Lerken only pursuant to the ord.ers oI .his Courr in Writ Petition No.57 l6 of 2013. It is statecl that pet r .oners do not have any vaLid perrnission for construction and t t rt structures raised are all illegal and no relief can be grar.rted. Iowever, due process of laq, shall be followed while t:rking any I :tion against the illegal structures. 4 Heard Sri M.S. Prasad, learned Scnic,; Counsel on behalf of Sri Gillela Sanjeev Reddy, learncd counsel for petitioners as well as lea_rned Special Govern I ent pleader ) /..,/ Sri S. Rahul Reddy on behalf of learned Additional Advocate Gencral for respondent officials.

5. The main grie vancc of petitioners rs that the action of Respondents 3 to 7 in interfering with their pcaceful possession over thc subjcct propcrq/ and allegcd demolirion of their houses u'ithout following duc process of lau', is violatior-r of the principles of natural justice. Considcring the innocuous prayer and in vieu. of the averment of thc 2,,,1 respondent in the counter that due proccss of las'u,ould be follorvecl u,hile taking acLion against iltegat structurcs, this Court desircs to allou'the relief sought in the Writ Petilion. As a matter of fact, Iearned Special Government Pleader also expressed no ,objection for doing so, though they filed counter opposing the case of peLitioners.

6. However, ert this stage, learned counsel for petitioners on record seeks time to file repl1 Lo [he counter', but, in spite of granting time, no reply has been filed so far. It is un understandable, when learned Special Government Pleader Sri \ 'i Rahul Reddy himself assures that thcy u,ill fol1ow the procedure l in accordance wrth lar.l., if thcy take any coercive action, what remains for petitioners to come up with a reply-afhdavit. Hcnce, this Court does not hnd any reason to kcep the Writ Petition pending by accommodating pelilioners tr.r fiie a replv. I I 6

7. Itr vie rr., of the above, the Writ petiti( n is allowed. IlespoL-rclents 3 Lo 7 are dirccted nol to intct lrrc with lhe 1-rc:Lcelirl possession of petitioners over the strlr-,rcr l)ropr: rt\., u,ithout follou'ing duc process of law. No costs.

8. Consequently, Miscellancous Appli,:rr ions, i[ anv sh:rll stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/.C.DEEPIKA ASS I ;TANT REgISTRAR To Kothagudem District, Telangana Telangana State Secretariat, Hyderabad.. 1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Dr. B. R 2. The D_istrict Collector, Bhadradri Kothagudem Diskict, T: 3. The lvlandal Revenue Officer, Chunchupallu Village and I 4- The District Panchayat Officer, Bhadradri Kothagudem t) 5. The Mandal P-anchayath Officer, Chunchupalli Vlllage an 6. Tahsildar, Chunchupatli Vill-ge, Chunchupalli Vi age anC 7. Station House Officer, Chunchupalli police Station, BharJ 8. One CC to SRl. SANJEEV REDDY G|LLELA, Advocat€ 9. Two CCs to ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL, Hiq r Kothagudem District, Telangana. Kothagudem District, Telangana. District, Telangana of Telangana. at Hyderabad [OUT]

10. Two CD Copies SECTION OFFICER \mbedkar angana. 'landal, Bhadradri ;tricl, Telangana. Mandal, Bhadradri Mandal, Bhadradri adri Kothagudem CPUC] Court for the State BM 5A 9v HIGH COURT DATED:0710712025 :/"'=- r 1, : ;T4I a\ * \) 2 1 J\l 216 * Sna 1g = ==a ORDER WP.No.24198 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS t/6 1\