The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court ma to suspend the the impugned order Rc.No. P7l1O64lZO2 passed by the respondent no.3 in respect of the house situated at Chirunomula village, Bonakal Mandal, Khamrr disposal of the above writ petition. ;umstances stated in ' be pleased pleased t, dated '15-5-2025 rearing H.No. 7-63, rm District pending lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Between: !91n9 V-e1lqtgshwarulu, s/o.Guruvaiah, age.80 yrs,occ etd. RTC conductor, FJO.11-9-22316,Burahanpuram, Khammam urbah town tt Tandal, khammam dist. ...PETITIONER/RESF'r )NDENT No.7 in WP Jakki Guruvaiah, S/o. pedda raghavulu, age.55 yrs. c chirunomula village, bonakal mandal, khammam dist. )c. coolie, R/o.7-63, The State of Telangna, Rep by its Principal Secretary (pa Department) Secretariat, at Hyderabad. rchayath raj ...RESPONDENT,l ETITIONER IN W.P. The District collector, Collectorate at khammmam. The District Panchayath office, at khammam The Divisional Pachayath office, at khammam. The Gram Panchavath Office, rep. by panchayath secre..r Bonakal mandal, khammam ry Chirunomula, The Station House Officer, Bonakal PS, Bonakal manda , at khammam. AND 1 2 3 4 6 7 Petition under Section 151 cPc praying that in the cir; rmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court ma,/ 5e pleased pleased to vacate the interim order dated 21-o$-202s passed in writ t etition No.24Bz1 of 2025 and dismiss the Writ Petition. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. G L NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No's.l to 4: Gp FOR PANCHA\,, rT RAJ RURAL DEV Counsel forthe Respondent No.S: SRl. KATAPRADEEP RE )Dy, S.C FOR GRAM PANCHAYATH -7 Counsel forthe Respondent No.6: Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.7: SRl. p.V. KRISHNAIAH The Court made the following: ORDER C THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHI.''T DEVI WRIT PETITION No.24821 of 2 02a; ORDBR This Writ Petition is filed challenging th: ' 15.05.2025 issued by respondent No.3, under whrr order dated i respondent No.5 was directed to change the name of the owner r,l House No.7- 63 situated at Chirunomula Vitlage, Bonakal Mande , Khammam District, in the demand register from that of the pir tioner to the name of respondent No.7 herein as per rules in vogue.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitior er, learned Govemment Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural I )evelopment, appearing for respondents No.l to 4, Sri K. pradeep IL rddy, learned Standing Counsel for Gram panchayat, appearing 1t : respondent No.5, leamed Government pleader for Home, rr ,pearing for respondent No.6, and Sri P.V. Krishnaiah, leame,I counsel for respondent No.7.

3. Brief facts leading ro the filing of this Writ pe t tion are that the petitioner and respondent No.7 are relatives an I the house bearing No.7-63 situated at Chirunomula Village, Bon kal Mandal, 2 TMDJ wp-24821 2025 Klammam District, was originally in the name of pedda Raghavulu. After the death of Pedda Raghavulu in the year 2001, the name of the petitioner was entered as the owner of the said house. Respondent No.7 thereafter made a complaint on

10.07.2024 to respondent No.3 stating that the name of the owner of the house had been changed without any valid documents relating to the immovable property and requested to take action against the Panchayat Secretary, Chirunomula Gram panchayat. Thereafter, the respondent No.4 was directed to conduct an enquiry and submit a report and after conducting the enquiry, the impugned order dated 15.05.2025 was passed. Challenging rhe same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the submissions made in the writ afhdavit, while the leamed Government pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, appearing for respondents No.l to 4, supported the impugned order, stating that an enquiry has been conducted, in which the petitioner had also participated, but the petitioner failed to produce any valid documents in support of his contentions. 5 TI\,1DJ \\P 24821_2025

5. The respondent No.7 filed a counter affidavit an( stay vacate petition to vacate the status quo order granted by tt is Court on

21.08.2025. I \

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.7 submir:d that the petitioner has taken advantage of staying in the hr,r se and had managed to get his name entered without any valid do, up"n,. und that the impugned order is a reasoned order after col ducting the enqulry.

7. Having regard to the rival contentions and tht material on record, this Court finds that the impugned order has ,een passed after a detailed enquiry by the authorities and that the p ,titioner has not been able to produce any valid documents in his srr ,port. Even before this Court, except for receipts dated 16.03.20 l/ issued by Panchayat Secretary, Chirunomula Gram Panchavu , no other documents have been produced. The respondents har r apparently considered all the relevant documents before passing tr : impugned order. In vieu' of the same, this Court does not find r ry merit in this Writ Petition and the same is liabte to be dismisser I 4 TMDJ wp 24EZl 2025 a

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

9. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// D/- A.V.S. PRASAD D PUTY REGIS CTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRl. G L NARASIMHA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRl. KATA PRADEEP REDDY SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT loPUCl

3. One CC to SRl. P.V. KRISHNAIAH Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUTj

5. Two CCs to GP FOR HOI\/E ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUTJ 6. Two CD Copies BSR I I HIGH COURT DATED:1311112O25 ORDER WP.No.24821 oi 2O25 1H E SI4 ( ou-- 3' [[ ?06 T.' * .q f/ r-r.v:{'(t t ' ,, j.,' : --:- -' "' WRIT PETITION IS DISMISSED WITHOUT COST o (+ 9\