The High Court · 2025

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 declaring the action of the respondents more particularly the acts of respondent No.3 in seeking to interfere with the properties of the petitioners bearing H.No.9-8-389/8 and 9-8-389/4, Situated at Sy.No. 27p, Bada Bazar, Golconda Fort, Hyderabad, without following due process of law, as wholly illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also against the principles of Natural Justice and consequen y direct the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the pe titioners over their properties bearing H.No.9- 8-389/8 and 9-8-389/4, Situated e t Sy.No. 27p, Bada Bazar, Golconda Fort, Hyderabad, without following due procr:ls of law. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the ci 1 umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court r ray be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 not to disposes or interfere in an' manner with the possestion of the petitioners over their properties bearing H.N t .9-B-3Bg/g and g- 8-389/A, Situated at Sy.No. 27p, Bada Bazar, Golconda i:ort, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the above Writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the cir: .rmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court r ay be pleased to allow the petitioners to carry out repairs or re-constructiorr on the property bearing H.No. 9-8-389/8 and 9-8-389/4, Situated in Sy.No.2; lp, Bada Bazar, Golconda, Hyderabad. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Between: 'I . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its principal Sec retary, Revenue Depafl ment, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The District Collector, Hyderabad Diskict, Hyderabad. 3. The Tahsildar, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad. AND

1. NUSRATH KHAN, W/o Azam Khan, Aged. 55 years, Occ llouse wife, R/o. H.No. 9-B-389/A, eita Mohammed Nagai, GotcondC tvtbnoat ifvJeiauro.' "' ...PETITIONERS, RESPONDENTS

2. ASFIYA KHAN, D/o. Azam Khan, Aged. 26 years, Occ. House wife, Rl/o. H.No. 9-8-389/4, Qila Mohammed Nagar, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad. 3. AIJAZ KHAN, S/o. Azam Khan, Aged.27 Years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H.No. 9- 8-389/8, Qila Mohammed Nagar, Golconda [\/andal, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order passed in lA.No.1 of 2023 in WP.No.31223 of 2023, dt:

09.11.2023 and dismiss the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI G. RAMAKRISHNA, APPEARING FOR SRI K. GIRIDHAR RAJU Counsel for the Respondents: SRI L. RAVINDER, AGP APPEARING ON BEHALF OF GP FOR REVENUE SRI K. MURALIDHAR REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.V,E.NUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No. 3L223 of :2023 ORDER: The present writ petition is hled by the petiti I rers under Article 22,6 of the Constitution ol- India, seeking issuzLt .ce of a writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents ,:specially the acts of respondent No.3 in interfering with the petitioners, .rroperties bearing H.No.9-8 389/8 and 9-B 389 /A, siruated in Sy.No. 2 t /p, Bad_a Bazar, Golconda Fort, Hyderabad withou[ following due I .ocess of lau,, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 21 and 3OO_A ,) the Constitution of India ancl contrary to the principles of natural just ce. Consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere witlr the petitioners, possession of the aforesaid properties except in accorI rnce with 1aw.

2. Heard Sri G. Ramakrishna, learned cou I .;el appearing on line for Sri K-Giridhar Raju, learned counsel fc r the petitioners and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assis[ant Government F ]eader appearing on behalf of learned Government pleader for Revenue lSri K.Muralidhar Reddv.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners s ubmits that the petitioner No. 1 is the absolule owner and possesrjrrr ol. the house property bearing Municipal No.9-g-3g9, situated in iurvey No.2T/p, Page 2 of5 admeasuring 3OO Sq.yds., at Bada Bazar, Golconda Fort, Hyderabad. The said property was acquired through a registered sale deed bearing Document No.3140 of 2O2O dated 24.O7.2O2O of SRO, Golconda, Hyclcrabad, cxecuted by the erstwhile owner, Sri M.A. Khaleel, through his agreemcnt of sale-cum-G.p.A. Holder, Mr.Azam Khan, under document No.0476 of 2o10 dated I r-o2-2oro. petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are the absolute owners and possessors of the house property bearing Municipal No.9-8 389, situated in Survey No.2Z /p, admeasuring 616.00 Sq.Yds., at Bada Bazar, Golconda Fort, Hyderabad having acquircd the same through a registered sale deed bearing document No.3l41 of 2O2O ol SRO, Golconda, Hyderabad, exccuted by the erstwhile owncr, Sri Mohammed Moinuddin Ahmed, through his Agreement of Sale cum-G.p.A. hotder, Mr.Azam Khan, under Documcnt No. 1604 of 2OlO dated 12 OS-2O10. The petitioners have been in peaceful, continuous and lawful possession and enjoyment of their respective house properties. Their names have been duly mutated in the rccords of the Greater Hyderabad Municipai Corporation, separate municipal housc numbers i.e., H.No.9_g-399/g and H.No. 9-g 389/A have been allotted and property taxes are being regularty paid to the Corporation. (a) On 02-1I-2O23, certain individuats claiming to bc olhcials of thc q,',i Respondent visited the petitioners, premises, asscrted that fhe \z ,I Page 3 of5 properties were government lands and demanded that Lhe petitioners to vacate within a week, threatening forcible eviction iu.l demolition. The petitioners, shocked by such conduct, produced the r registered sale deeds, tax receipts and supporting documents tr establish lawful ownership. Horvever, the said personnel behaved rrrdelv, refused to consider the documents and stated that they were icting under the orders of the 3.d respondent. They further w.tLt ned of serious consequences if the petitioners failed to vacate. The petitioners immediately approached the office of the 3.a responrl :nt to clarify the situation, but were denied an audience by the staff, rv ro claimed to be acting under strict instructions. Similar efforts marl r before the 2"a respondent also proved futile. The petitioners, therefore, have a genuine apprehension of being forcibly disposscssed of their p -r rperties, causing them irreparablc loss and hardship. The acts of the 3 d respondent in attempting to dispossess the petitioners from their lav,fully purchased private properties, without issuing any notice or fol1o r Lng clue process of law, are illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional ancl ,riolative of the principles of natural justice. In these circumstancc:,, the pe[itioners have no other effecrive or alternative remedy excer) ro invoke the extraordinary iurisdiction of this Hon'ble court under 1 rticle 226 of the Constitution of India, as the impugned actions of t re respondents infringe the pe titioners' fundamenlal and cons.i utional rights guaranteed under Articles 2l and 30O-A of the Constitrr ion. i,: Page 4 of5

4. per contra, the learned Assistant Government pleader, by filing counter affidavit on behalf of 3rd respondent, submits that the subject lands, including Survey No.27 /p, Bada l3azar, Golconda Fort, are recorded as Government lands in the official revenue records. The land in question vests with the State as surplus land under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976, following a declaration by the originar landhorder, Mohd.Kareemuddin Khan and subsequent determinarion of surplus land in CC No.B1/61 02/76. The land was vested with the State on 2g.05.1992 and is under the jurisdiction of the Respondent No.3, Tahsildar, Golconda Mandal. Further, the land \4as later correlated to T.S.No.27, Block_I, Ward No_ 17 under the Town Survey Land Register (TSLR). Out of the surplus land, 85O Sq. meters was allotted to Smt.Sohya Badar under G.O.Ms.No. l119 (24.1O.2OO9), with the balance of l9l\.4T sq. meters remaining vested with the State. The petitioners, however, have unlawfully encroached upon this land, which was confirmed by a field inspection conducted by respondenr No.3's sta1r, who found the petitioners in unauthorized occupation. The craim of the petitioners based on registered documents ald payment of municipal taxes is legally untenable, as such documents do not confer ownership or title to the land in question. The petitioners, actions amount to encroachmenL on Government land and their attempt to misuse .I I'age 5 ofs I constrtutional remedies is evident. In light of tht above, the u.rit petrtion is baseless and should be dismissed in its entrr ety

5. This Court, having heard the respectivr learnecl counsel and upon perusing the material on record, with Lrt r.naking any observations on the merits and demerits of the cast, opines that the rival claims of the pctitioners and the official re spondt, .t t:s rt:garding the property can be ad judicated only by the competen r c vil Court. It is further noticed from the rccord that the staff of the oi[.rr al visited the premises where the petitioners are residing : nd to vacate. In thesc clrcumstances, this Court dirr < ts respondents to act stricrly rn act:ordance u.,ith larv ancl steps taken are u,ithit_t the lramework of due process. shall also refrain from adopting any coercive or high_h: r cled me:rsures against the pedtioners and .1ny action, if required, sh:rll I e precedecl by due notice and an opportunity for the petitione rs to pr('i .n t I heir case, in adherence to the principles of natural justice. 1' lsure that any 'l'l ,e rr.spor-rdents the official asked them respondents ,i 6 of. No costs stand dismissecl With the above observations, this u,rit perlt(nisdisposed il any penrl r g, shall also Interlocutory applications, To //TRUE COPY// 1 Ih" Principal Secretarv. Secretariat, Hyderabad.' Revenue Departme ) The District.Collector, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad r sD/-r,v.s. PRASAD PEPUT'/ REGISTRAR [._ l- SEC ION OFFICER State f Telangana, r-Il

3. The Tahsildar, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad. 4. One CC to SRI K. GIRIDHAR RAJU, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

6. Two CD Copies MP LS t :'1 i-IIGH COURT DATE D:2711012025 ,t l.) ,-) I 1L ., r/, a- o (_.- 2 B ilt\l 7n25 * Or.S PAIC\-rLO * \ (' j2 7 C)). I I ORDER WP.No.ii1223 oI 2023 DISPOSING OF THE WTIIT PETITION WITI-IOUT COSTS 4 v