The High Court · 2025

a praying thai in the High Court may be )re particularly one in 1' the respondents in rds without giving any oceedings are illegal, direct the respondent Sy Nos.12l3/AA5/2 to I of Ac 0.30 Gts, Sy i12 to an extent of Ac lSy Nos12/3/AA/3/1 to i of Ac 0.10 Gts, Sy ,'3lAA4l2 to an extent s itu ated at Kongara )trict wtthout following lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the r i the affidavit filed in support of the petition, if,"-Hign Court rz the respondents not enter/interfere wrth the Iossessror petitioners in Sy Nos.1 2/3/ AAS1? to an extent of Ac 0 30 Gtr; an extent of Ac 0.30 Gts, Sy Nos 12l3lAA2lZ to an exre- Nos12/3/AA"t12 to an extent of Ac 1.00 Gts, Sy Nos.12l3/A1,, 0.10 Gts, Sy Nos12/3/AA,/3/1 to an extent of Ac 0.10 Gts, Sy extent of Ac 0.10 Gts, Sy Nos 12l3/AA,/5/i to an extent ol Nos.12l3lAA4l2 to an extent of Ac 0.30 Gts, total comes l() gts s_ituated at Kongara Khurudu Village _B, Maheshwaram Ir District without following due process of law. pending dispose cumstances sta ted in ,r be pleased to direct )f tie lands of the Sy Nos 12.r3lAA3/2 to of Ac 0.30 Gts, Sy :/1 lo an extent of Ac Nos 1 2/3/AA4/1 to an j\c 0.10 Gts, and Sy an extent of Ac 5.00 andal, Ranga Reddy of the writ petitjon Gounsel for the Petitioners: SRI CH. KOTESWARA RAO Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 ,3 and 6: SRI L. RAVtNll AGP FOR REVEI :R, UE Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Gp FOR MUNICIPAL At, URBAN DEVELOPMEN'T IINISTRATION Counsel for the Respondent No.4 and 5: SRI V. NARAS|Mf SC FOR HMDA A GOUD, The Court made the following: ORDER /, ,./ '/ .// ,,/ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.26437 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: "...pleased to issue an appropriate Wit Order or direction more portianlarly one in the nafitre of Wit of Mandamus declaing the action of the respondents in interfering into the peoceful possession of the petitioners londs utithout gtuing any notice uithout notifuing the lands under land acquisition proceedings are itlegal Arbitrary and in uiolation of principtes Nafi)ral Justice and to direct tle respondent authoities to not to enter into th.e lands of tte petitioners tn Sa.No.12/3/AAS/2 to an extent of Ac.O.3O Gts, Sg.No.12/ 3/AAS/ 2 to dn extent of Ac.0.30 Gts, Sg.No.12/3/AA2/2 to an ertent of Ac.O.30 Gts, Sg.No.l2/3/AA/12 to an ertent of Ac.1.0O Gts, Sy.No.12/3/AA/2/1 to an ertent of Ac.0.10 Gts, Sa.No.12/3/AA/3/ 1 to an ertefi of Ac.0.10 Grs, Sy.No.12/3/AA4/ 1 to an extent of Ac.0.10 Grs, SA.No.12/3/AA/5/l to an ertent of Ac.0.10 Gts and SA.No.12/3/tuq4/2 to an extent of Ac.0.30 Gts, total comes to an ertent of Acs.5.00 gts, situated at Kongara Khurudu-B Village, Maheshutaram Mandal, Ranga Red.d.g Distict u.tithout follou.ting due process of laut...,' 2, The brief facts of the case are that petitioner Nos.1 to 4 and one Jonna-lagadda Venkat Reddy have purchased the land to zrn extent of Acs.S.OO guntas (each one acre) in I \ Page 2 of6 Sy.No.12/3/AA, situated at Kongara Khuru: u Village-B, Maheshwarama Manda_l, Ranga Reddy Distric under the registered sa-1e deed bearing document No. 133,

201.1, dated

02.Ol.2Ol4 from one Sri M.J.Mathew, u.l o in turn purchased under the registered sale deed bear r g document No.612l 1996, dated 04.07.t996 from N.Ranga i leddy. After that the said Jonnalagadda Venkat Reddy s: d away his share of land to an extent of Ac. 1.00 guntas .o petitioner No.5 uide registered sale deed bearing docume:r No.2383 of 2016, dated 02.05.2076. Thereafter, petitionr:: Nos. I to 3 and 5 have sold an extent of Ac.0.10 gurL ia.s each to petitioner No.4 uide registered sale deed bearir r; document No.5950/2017, dated 19.O7.2017. Thereby, pr: tioner No .4 became the owner of the land to an extent of Acr; .2.00 guntas and petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and 5 became owners : the land to an extent of Ac.0,30 guntas each and all of then. i3ot mutated the land and got issued the digitatized pattadar 6 assbooks in their favour. Since then, they are in continu< rrs physical possession of the subject property. Page 3 of6

3. In the month of July, 2O2S the officers of the respondents visited the site arrd started measuring the land and when the petitioners questioned about the same, they informed tJ.at the land was acquired. for the purpose of lalng a new road and also informed that they have notified land under the land acquisition and published the said notification in November , 2024 and also called for objections from the interested persons in March, 2025. But the petitioners have not noticed any notification / publication and made enquiries with concerned officers with regard to the notification and the petitioners came to know that O2.1I.2O24 in the Eenadu Daily News Paper respondent No. 1 published a notification declaring/ notifying the certain lands of various villages to be acquired for the public purpose of laying a six lane 300 feet new road from Skill Development University to ORR Exit No.13.

4. Further, they also notified certain lands in the Kongara Khurudu Village where the lands of the petitioners are Page 1 ol6 situated, but in the said notification tlL, lands in Sy.No,12/3/AA of the petitioners are not m,l rtioned and neither the names of the petitioners nor the na :nes of their vendors are mentioned and therefore, it is un,l :rstood that our lands are not notified for acquisition fc r the public purpose. Further, it is noticed that on 29.03.2( 25 in Times of India Daily News Paper a public notification v, by respondent No.5 calling for the objectior rs published .; from the interested persons to submit before either to Ll l, HMDA or to the Principal Secretary, MA a:-rd UD Departmr nt, in which certain survey numbers were mentioned, but tLr petitioner's survey numbers were not in the said Public notil ::ation.

5. Heard Sri Ch.Koteswara Rao, learrL, d counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri L.RavirL, [er, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, €J pearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and perused the record.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would ,iubmit that the petitioners herein purchased the subject I rnds in the yea:. 2Ol4 and their naJnes were also mutated irL l_he revenue Page 5 of6 records. Earlier to the purchase of the petitioners, the name of their vendor and the name of their vendor,s vendor also recorded in the revenue records. In the notification issued by the official respondents neither the narnes of the petitioners nor their vendor, who purchased the land nearly 20 years back and also their survey numbers were not there. From the date of purchase, the petitioners are in peaceful possession of the subject property, without any intern:ption.

7. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondent-authorities without giving any notice arrd without following due process of law are trying to enter into the lands of the petitioners illegally, which is causing irreparable loss and hardship to the petitioners. Hence, the present writ petition.

8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that the petitioners without making any representation to the respondent-authorities have rushed to this Court by filing the present writ petition, which is misconceived. Hence, seeks to dismiss the writ petition. -t"? - Page 6 of6 ,\

9. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circ'- 'nstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed, granting I berty to the petitioners to file a representation in art appro!'' :.ate moclule of Bhu Bharati with the respondent-authoritrt : On filing such representation, the respondent-auth,) ities sha]l consider the same arrd pass appropriate orde - ,, strictlv in accordance with law, by putting the petitio .: ,:rs and a-11 interested parties on notice a-nd alfordin 5 opportunity. They shall pass a reas( them an ned order, communicate copy of the said order to ttre pt,t itioners and complete the said exercise within a period of eigl t (08) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of represent: :.ion. There shall be no orders as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaleous petitions, if rl ry, pending, shall stand dismissed. SD/- Smt. U. SUDHA SS STANT REGISTRAR 1 //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Secretarv for Revenue (Land Acquisition) Depannr nt' TheStateof Telangana, S-ecretariat, Hyderabad Telangana \./

2. The Principal Secretary for Municipal Administration art Urban Development - iM;;Jubioepirtrient, fne State of Telangana, l) :cretariat' Hvderabad' Telangana.

3. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy, Ranga Reddy Di ; "ict 4. The Commissioner, The Hyderabad Metropolitan D€v€ (n'ri,toAl, Swarna Jiyanthi eomplex, Ameerpet, Hydera rad opment Authority kt;;*;.-

5. The Director Planning -ll. Swarna Jayanthi Complex, The Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Ameerpet. Hyderabad

6. The Revenue Divisional officer, Kandukuru, Ranga Reddy, Ranga Reddy District

7. One CC to Sri CH. Koteswara Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

9. Two CC to The GP for Municipal Administration Urban Development, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad[OUT]

10. One CC to Sri V. Narasimha Goud, SC for HMDA[OPUC]

11. Two CD Copies TJ BM Ty HIGH COURT \ DATED:1311012025 ORDER WP.No.26437 of 2025 ...J3itt: r€ '1.-r '/ 'Ji/ort'-J i h , i tl.)t * t t29' =.:_: DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS r4@c'a w d(ab