The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of 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 petitioner in respect of his Ptot No. 386, Block A, in Sy. No. 135 part, situated at, Gowthami Nagar, Edulanagualapally Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, 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 r:. 386, admeasuring 500 square yards, Block A, in Sy. No. 135 part, situatec at Gowthami Nagar, Edulanagulapally village, Ramchandrapuram. Mandal, l;angareddy District, without following due process of law and without issuing any r otice. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the c r )umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court m; / be pleased to direct the respondent No. 5 and his sub-ordinates not to interfere v ith the possession of the petitioner in respect of his Plot No. 386, admeasuring 50 rsquare yards, Block A, in Sy. No. 135 part, situated at Gowthami Nagar, Ed I anagulapally Village, Ramchandrapuram IVlandal, sangareddy District, without fo lrwing due process of law and without issuing any notice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ESLAVATH RAJU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1,3,4 and 5: SMT. S. SRI( /ANTHI, AGP FOR R: /ENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR MUNICIPAL A: VIINISTRATION URBAN DEVELOPMENI Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA tt :DDY, SC FOR MUNICIPALIT" The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No,313 85 of 2O2l THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 Between: Smt. P.Padmaja ...Petitioner AND The State of Telalgana, Rep. by the Special Chief Secretarlr to Government , Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & (5) others. ORDER: ,..Respondents Heard Sri Eslavath Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue and Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing 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.S and their sub-ordinates in interfering with and demolishing the compound wall of the petitioner in 2 respect of petitioner's Plot No.3B6, Block A, in Sy.No. 135 part, situated at Gowthami Nagar, Edulanaguz lapally Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy Distric:1 (for brevity, ,,the subject property") ald threatening to dispossi,r s the petitioner from her plot, without issuing any notice and r dthout following due process of law, as illegat and arbitrary.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner furthr r submits that, while admitting the matter, this Court passed int :rim order dated Ol.l2.2O2l directing the official respondents no_ to interfere with the petitioner's possession over the subject prc perty, except in accordance with the procedure established by 1z w. However, in spite of lapse of more than four years, the respor dent authorities have not filed counter or vacate petition for denyir g the averments made by the petitioner in the writ affidavit. In I ew of the same, learned counsel requested this Court to allow th: Writ petition by directing the respondent authorities not to in erfere with the possession of the petitioner over the subject 6 roperty without following due process of 1a',r..

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Govr rnment pleader for Revenue submits that if the petitioner is in :t ;ssession of the subject property, the respondents wiil not int:rfere i,r.ith the \ 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, '"vithout following due procedure of law. There shall be no order as to costs

6. Miscellaleous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. SD/-T. SRINIVASA ASSI TANT R DY TRAR //TRUE COPY// TION OFFICER To, '1 . The Special Chief Secretary to Govt, The State of Telangana, Revenue Department, BRK Bhavan, T.S. Secretariat, Hyderabad. :

2. The Principal Secretary to Govt, The State of Telangana, MA and UD Department, T.S. Secretariat, Hyderabad

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. The Commissioner, Tellapur Municipality, Tellapur, Sangareddy District. 7. One CC to Sri Eslavath Raju, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

9. One CC to Sri Pufta Krishna Reddy, SC for Municipality[OPuc] 'l0.Two CC to The GP for Municipal Administration Urban Development, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad[OUT] '1 1.Two CD Copies TJ HIGH COURT DATED:1711212025 ORDER WP.No.31385 of 2021 ( li 3ra 16 (- -)( O 0 irl ti 2!19 z .o,\, * -.t- 12": \.: , DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS s t