High Court · 2025

6. Smt. Kadamandla Prathibha,, W/o. K. Augusteen Aravind Kumar, Aged 35 years, Oce Private Employee, Rl/o. Plot No.8, West Part, Sri D-urganjanadri i'lagar, Manneguda Village, lrayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 lssue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in order dt.05 10-2016 and the subsequent memo vide Letter No.C/124O12O10, dt.05-10-2016 issued by the 3rd respondent and set aside the same as arbitrary, ilegar against the principles of naturallustice and equity jurisdiction, 'rthout l.A. NO: 2 OF 2017(WPMP . NO: 8237 O F 20171 Petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the circLt lstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High cou 1 may be preased suspend the operation of the impugned order dt.05.10.2016 trr d the subsequent memo vide Letter No.c/124012010 dt.05.10.2016 issued by te 3rd respondent and direct the Respondent No.3 herein to take custody or the property i,e., H.N0.7-131lP-18, Manneguda Village, Ragannaguda (;.am panchayat, Hayathnagar lrlandar. R-R.District, Terangana state in questio. and keep it under lock and key pending disposal of the Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI R.BALA SUBRAMANYAM Counsel for the Respondents No.1to3 : ASST. Gp FOR REVEN JE Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : ASST. Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No. 6 : SRI J.L.BABU The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.67O9 of 2OL7 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AsSistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3, Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondent No.4 and learned counsel for the respondent Nos.S and 6 and perused the material on record

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is questioning the restoration order dated 05. \O.2O16 issued by the respondent No.3 under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. In view of the disputes with the unofhcial respondents, the J petitioner has filed O.S.No.1425 of 2016 on the file of the XXII Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, and the same is pending for adjudication and also there is no interim order in favour of the petitioner. Subsequently, the respondent authorities initiated proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C and seized the property on 24.08.2016 Thereafter, the Deputy Collector and Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, directed I ,) \- \'.,\r MRI/VRO to take over the possession of t - 3 said property till the ownership and possession is delivert C by this Court or Competent Authority so as to pres(l ve peace and tranquility. Thereafter, the respondenL No.3-Revenue Divisional Officer released the subject property uide proceedings 1n Lr.No.C/t24O/2016 dated 05.10.2016 in view of the consequential memo issued ly the Deputy Collector and Tahsildar, Hayathnagar, Iianga Reddy District for release of the seized propert'/ under 145 of Cr.P.C.

3. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed suit for specihc performance with regard to the drr putes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent s is pending for adjudication. the respondent No.3 in tht report dated .t

22.08.2016, clearly stated that respondent No.5 sold the land admeasuring 212 Sq.Yards in Sy.Nos 56 lAA, 57 lA, 58 lA and 59 lA situated at Manr-r--Juda Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy Dir trict, to the petitioner by receiving Rs.2 lakhs as advarrce. However, before completion of the stipulated agreenl :nt period, on

24.O3.2016, respondent No.5 sold out the s I rre property in favour of respondent No.6 by taking total sale consideration of Rs.62.5 lakhs. In view of the same, petitioner requested not to release the property lrom Section 145 Cr.P.C

4. It clearly shows that the petitioner is claiming title over the subject property by giving Rs.2 lakh as advance for purchase and filed a suit for specific performance and the same is pending for adjudication. It is a fact that there is a registered document bearing No.2389 of 2OL6 dated 24.03.2016 between the respondent No.S and 6 and no interim order in favour olthe petitioner. I I

5. In view of the same, the respondent No.3 has passed impugned order dated 05.10.2016 by deleting the subject property from Section 145 of Cr.P.C. and there is no irregularity in passing of impugned order and this Court does not need any interference. The petitioner has to agitate his rights 1n pending civil proceedings and mere pending of the Civil Suit is not a ground to continue the proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C, 1973

6. In view of the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to t I .1 - pursue the matter before the Civil Court, r'here the suit pending lor adjudication

7. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, 1'r nding in this writ petition shall stand closed. sbl-All4eD ABDUU0 kHAN ASt iSTEN]REGISTRAR \i \ \-- $Ecrtoru oFFlcER //TRUE COPY// To, 1 The Princioal secretary, Revenue Department, secretarr t Building, state of ' reLngind. Saifabad. Hyderabad - 500001

2.TheDistriCtCollector,RangaReddyDistrict,LakdikaporllHyderabad. 3. The Spl Grade Deputy Collector Cum Revenu^e Division: ' Officer' Saroornaqar Division tn"---i"iig^'t"d as RD-O lbrahim I rtnam Division) i;;i#.ti 6;;;;Rd;;..ir",s';nnjg'd' GP' Abudurra I trmet rvandar Ranga ReddY District.

4. The Station House Officer, P S Adibathi' Cyberabad' E a ;t' Ranga Reddy r District.

5. One CC to SRI R.BALA SUBRAMANYAM' Advocate [O 'UC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the Stat : of Telangana IOUT] One CC to SRI J.L BABU' Advocate lOPUCl Two CD CoPies. 7 8 BSK MMT % HIGH COURT DATED:1 1l}Bt2OZs ,'" 1 I / t.r\ -1, \' 'i\i :, i i I iI {rl/r ,l ORDER WP.No.6709 of 2O1t DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS t\