The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularty one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners land in Sy,No.136/1 admeasuring 3424 square yards at Nagole Village, Ranga Reddy District and destroying the ':.it.' i I ; l : I I a fencing made by the Wr"it petitioner as arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, against the principles of natural .justice and equity and con; rquentially direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession z nd enjoyment of the petitioners land in Sy.No.136/ 1 admeasuring 3424 sql i re yards at Nagole Village, Ranga Reddy District l.A. NO: 'l OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 21't79 OF 2017) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the < ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou r pass interim orders directing the respondents not to inter( possession and enjoyment of the Writ petitioner's . admeasuring 3424 square yards at Nagole Village, F; pending final disposal of the W.P.No.21179 12017 by the Hr may be pleased to :e with the peaceful .td in Sy.No.136/1 nga Reddy District r'ble Hiqh Court l.A. NO: 2 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 21180 OF 20171 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the r ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cor r may be pleased to pass interim order directing the District Collector, i.e., the lespondent No.2 to enquire into the matter and initiate disciplinary proce :dings against the respondents 5 to 13 and submit a report to this Hon'ble Cr urt pending the Writ Petitio n lro. 'l lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Between: Division, Ranga Reddy District.

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Saifabad, Hyderabad -500001. 2. ThA District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 3. The Spl. Grade Deputy Collector Cum, Revenue Divisional officer, Malkajigiri 4. The Tahsildar, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy Diskict. 5. B. Gurumurthi, Ivlandal Surveyor, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 6. M. Alakya, Village Revenue Officer, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga 7. B. G6pal Reddy, Village Revenue Officer, Ramanthapur Village, Uppal B. V. Viswanat6, Villag6 Revenue Officer, Nacharam Village, Uppal lvlandal, 9. D. Radhika,- Mandal Revenue lnspector, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal, 10- B. R:aja, tri'landal Revenue lnspector, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Ranga Reddy District. Ranga Reddy District. Reddy District. '1 1 . Swamy, Village Revenue Assistant, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Reddy District. -12. Nagainani, Village Revenue Assistant, Nagole Village, Uppal lvlandal, Ranga

13.Santosh, Village Revenue Assistant, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Reddv District AND ,.'ET.r.NERSiRES'.NDENTS 4,4/ S. Niounaa Builders & Developers, Rep. by its authorized agent Sri D. Hanumantha Rao, S/o. Narsimham, Aged 49 Years, Occ Business, R/o. H.No.B-7-92iNE6/1, Road No.3, Santhoshimatha Colony, Hasthinapuram, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State. .,.PETITIONERYRESPONDENT 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 orders dt: 31.10.2017 passed in WP.MP.No.21'179 of 2O17 in WP.No.17328 of 2017 and dismiss the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI' KATIKA RAVINDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: Smt. S. SRAVANTHI, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5to13: - The Court made the following: ORDER i I t 'a THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE K.SAR]I IH WRIT PETITION No.17328 of 2O!j ORDER: Heard Sri Katika Ravinder Reddy, leau ed Counsel appcaring for the petitioncr :rnd Smt S:Sraivar thi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue .r.)pearing for the respondents and perused the entire materi r on record.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner: is :ol pressing against the respondent Nos.5 to I 3. In vier,r. r f the same, the writ petition is dismissed againsl thc resp,r rdent Nos.5 to 13.

3. Learned Counsel for thc petitioncr subrr ils that the petitioner is questioning the action of the re; rondents in interfering with the possession and enjovrr ent of the pctitioner's land in Sy.No.136/1 admeasuring 1424 Square yards at Nagole Village, I?anga Reddy - istrict and I destroying the lencing made by thc writ petition )r. 4, Learned Counsel for the petitioner fur- Ler submits that the pctitioner is the owner of the propertl, .o an extent 7 t \ ..:" t 2 sx,J W.P.No.17328 oJ 2017 of 3424 Square Yards equivalent to 29 guntas in Sy.No.l36ll of Nagole Village, Ranga Reddy District and the respondents are interlering ',irith the possession of the petitioner by removing the fcncing in spite of petitioner purchased the property through registerecl Sale Deeds bearing Document No.27O77 /20 15, dated 3O.12.2015 and Document No.2O3 15/20 i6, dated 1O.OB.20 16.

5. Learned Counsei lor the petitioner furthe;: submits that adjacent to the lanc.l of the petitioner in Sy.No. 13611, there is a, Government land in Sy.No..135 and the respondent Nos.5 to 7 have erectecl a Board in the property of the petitioner as it is aL Government 1and. The respondent No.4 has written to the District Collector seeking clarihcation and on thc basis of the clarification issued by the District Collector, the rnatter was referred to the Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records for demarcating the land in Sy.No.135 and 136 of Nagole Village and the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records eifter conducting the Survey has demarcated the ) --l 3 SK,J W.P-No..'. '324 oJ 2017 lancls in Sy.No.135 and 136 along with the ;l;sistance of the Mandal Surveyor and fixr:d the boundar es by duly conducting a Palchanama and submitting a . eport along with sketch maps. Subsequently, the Distr.r t Collector, Ranga Reddy District has also directed the Tahs ldar, Uppal Manda-l to remove the sign board in Sy.No. 136 .nd reiocate the same in Sy.No.i35 which is a Governmer- Land vide lettcr No.E4 1327912016, dated 23.08.2016 a:l based on the same the Tahsildar, Uppal Mandal issued e memo vide l,etter No. B/31212016, dated 26.0A.2016 to -he Manda-l Revenue Inspector (MRI) and Village Revenue ,llicer (VRO) to relocate the sign board amd in compliance rf the same the board was relocated. While it being so, thc espondents without any notice have illegally entered into the private iand of the petitioner in Sy.No.136/1and de stroyed the fencing done by the petitioner. In view of ttL, same, the said action of the respondents is arbitrary anc illegal and requested to direct the respondents not to interl :re with the possession of the petitioner. ) I. 'r.. ;ai: ! i\'. r€r i:l l 4 w.p.No.1732a "r if;i 6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Gorrernment Pleader lor Rcvr:nue basing on the counter fiied by the respondent No.4 submits that the respondents are not interfering with the possession of the petitioner in Sy.No.t36 lL and further stating that the petitioner has encroached the Governmcnt lald in Sy.No. 135. In vieu, of the same, thcy are interfcring with thc possession of the petitioner. Moreover, alter passing interim order by this Court dated 31.10.20 17, Lhc petitioner has encroached,22 guntas of the land in Sy.No.135. Iir vicrv of the same, there is no merit in the writ petition and requested to dismiss the writ petition by passing appropriate ordcrs.

7. After hearing both sides and perusing the material on record, this Court is ol th c consiclerr:d view that the petitioner is the owner of the property to an extent of 3424 Square Yards equivalent to 29 guntas in Sy.No.136/I of Nagole Village, Ranga Reddy District. He purchased the propertSr ald there is no dispute with regard to the l.rownership of the petitioner. Now the case of the petitioner l i i I I ! l 1 i I I I 5 sr,J W.P.No. t '32a of 2017 is that the respondents without any power, a: r interfering with the possession of the petitioner and dt: troying the fencing done by lhe petitioner. Barlier, the espondents have erected a sign board in the property of th: petitioner. The District Collector issued proceedings ot. 23.08.2016 directing the Tahsildar, Uppal Manda-l to remc,'e the board erected in the suit schedule property and direr:.ed the erect the sarne in the Sy.No.135 which belor gs to the Government. Thereafter, the respondents zu'r interfering with the possession of thc petitioner, hence, 11 e petitioner filed the instant writ petition. The respon j rnts in the counter stated that they are not interferi : g rvith the posscssion of the petitioner in Sy.No.136/1 But, after passing interim order passed by this Court, 11 e petitioner has encroached the Government iand in Sy.Nc .135 and in view of the same the respondents ar:e interfe I ng with the possession of the petitioner.

8. In view of the above circumstances and rleadings of the both sides, the writ petition is disposed of , lirecting the I l 6 w.p.No.tza2E "r if;i respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner in Sy.No.t36/1. If the respondents want to conduct survey, they have to issue notice to the petitioner and conduct the survey in presence of the petitioner and the petitioner has to cooperate with the respondents at the time of conducting survey arld after conducting the survey, if the petitioner is in possession of the Government rand, the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate steps for eviction of the petitioner. Til1 conducting the survey and finalizing the same, the interim orcier granted earlier by this Court dated 3l.lO.2OlZ wr1l continue. There shall be no order as to costs. 9 As a sequel, the miscellaleous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. AH EDABDULLA KHAN S TANT REGIS //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER \ To, l l I l I l ! i I i i 1 Division, Ranga Reddy District. 1 . The Principal Secretary, ReVEnue Department, S bad -500001. T.S.,Hydera 2. The District Collecto r, Rang 3. The Spl. Grade Dep uty Coll 4. The Tahsildar, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 5. One CC to SRl. KATIKA RAVINDER REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court forthe State of Telangana at 7. Two CD Copies a Reddy District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. ector Cum, Revenue Divisional Officer, Malkajigiri Hyderabad [OUT] riat Building, Saifabad, B IVI GJP w HIGH COURT DATED:1 110812025 I I /'it. .- l:, r 1' -- lt.l \.) \, ,,j i ({ r" /,. 19 BEC lnzq i ,. 1':..- 1-,.-,-rr ORDER WP.No.17328 of 2017 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \a .A$d \K,rt"9 (\t' I :Fli.., ' '1 o;rrg,' .,, i.!,;