Sri Lankela Venkat Reddy v. UD Department, T.S. Secretariat' Hyderabad

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe constitution of lndia 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 more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the respondent No- 5 and his sub-ordinates in interfering and demolishing the compound wall of the r petitioner in respect of his Plot No. 869, Block c, in sy. No. 135 part, situated at GoMhamiNagar,EdulanagualapallyVillage'RamachandrapuramMandal' 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 plot No. 869, admeasuring 300 square yards, Block C, in Sy. No. 135 part, situated at Gowthami Nagar, Edulanagulapally village, Ramchandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District, without following due process of law and without issuing any rotice. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the cirr umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High courl may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 5 and his sub ordinates not t ) interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of his plot No. B(;t , admeasuring 300 square yards, Block C, in Sy. No. 135 part, situated : Gowthami Nagar, Edulanagulapally Village, Ramchandrapuram Mandal, irngareddy District, without following due process of law and without issuing any r otice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ESLAVATH RAJU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1,3 TO S: SMT. S.SRAVAII 'Hl, AGP FOR REVT NUE Counsel forthe Respondent No.2; cp FOR MPCLADMN & t RBAN DEV Counsel forthe Respondent No.6: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA RI: )Dy, SC FOR MPCL The Court made the following: ORDER b I i IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.3O5O1 of 2o2L THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 Between: Sri Lankela Venkat Reddy ...Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Special Chief Secretar5r to Government , Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & (5) others. ORDER: ...Respondents Heard Sri Eslavath Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. S. Sravanthi, Iearned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Starding Counsel for Municipalities, appearing for the respondents. Perused the material on record.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition seeking to declare the action of respondent No.5 and their sub-ordinates in interfering with and demolishing the compound wa-ll of the petitioner in c respect of petitioner's Piot No.869, Block C, in I situated at Gowthami Nagar, Edulanaguai: ],.No.135 Part, pa-Ily Village, Ramachaldrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District ( br brevity, "the subject property") and threatening to dispossess the petitioner from his plot, without issuing any notice ald rn i hout foilorving due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further. submits that, while admitting the matter, this Court passed int€1 im order dated

25.11.2021 directing the officia_l respondents not , r interfere with the petitioner's possession over the subject prol; :rty, except in accordance with the procedure established by la..r . However, in spite of lapse of more than four years, the respon: :nt authorities have not filed counter or vacate petition for denyin: the averments made by the petitioner in the writ affidavit. In vi: l, of the same, learned counsel requested this Court to ailow the \ /rit Petition by directing the respondent authorities not to int: -fere with the possession of the petitioner over the subject p- rperty u,ithout following due process of law.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Gover rment pleader for Revenue submits that if the petitioner is in por session of the subject property, the respondents will not inti:. fere with the ; 1 ) 3 petitioner's possession over the subject property, without following due process of law and requested this Court to pass appropriate orders.

5. In view of the submissions made on either side, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the subject property, without following due procedure of Iaw. There shall be no order as to costs

6. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. sD/- AS A. SRINIVASA REDDY ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To 1 { nt, BRK Bhavan, T.S. Secretariat, Hydera bad

1. The Special Chief Secretary to Govt, Revenue DePa T.S. Secretariat, HYd erabad, State of Telangana 2. The PrinciPal Secretary to Govt, State of Telanga na, MA and UD Department' 3. The District Collector, Sang areddY District at Sangared dy 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer , Sangareddy District at SangareddY 5. The Tahsildar' Ramchand raPuram Mandal ,SangareddY District 6. The Commissi oner, TellaP ur Mu nicipalitY, Tellapur, Sang areddy District. 7. One CC to SR 8. Two CCs to GP FOR REVE NUE, High Cou rt for the tate of Telangana, at R MPCL ADMN & URBAN DEV, High Court for the State 9. Two C RAJU, Advocat e [OPUC IESLAVATH Hvd erabad. IOU Tl CS tO GP FO of Telang ana, at Hyderab I S EDDY, SC FOR MPCL [OPUC] ad. [OUT] PUTTA KRISHNA R

10. One CC to SRI 11.Two CD CoPies t PSK \A HIGH COURT DATED:1711212025 ORDER WP.No.30501 of 2021 -- z F.S H (] (-) '7 0 Iil 2!2i * 1,. Z. iv' ./, DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \