High Court · 2025

r praying that in the High Court may be ,lne in the nature of r: No.3 in trying to 980 to an extent of nka lrlandal by the illegal, arbitrary and rn not to dispossess extent of 7'12-55 sq ryithout following the Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the cir :umstances atated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High cor- l may be pleased to direct the official respondents herein not to dispossess ttl petitioner from her open site in sy. No. 979 & 980 to an extent of 712.s5 r q. yards situated at challuru Village of Veenavanka Mandal, without following iue process of law, pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI Y.ASHOK RAJ Counsel for the Respondents No.1to3 : ASST. GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4&5 : ASST. GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6to19 : No representation The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUM,! R JUKANTI WRIT PETITION No.6455 of 20) 6 ORDER: This Writ Petition is tlled seeking the foll:,ring prayer "...to issuc an Writ, order or directio p:rrticularly one in the nature of writ of ma r declanrrg thc action of the respondent No.li i to drspossess thc pctitioner from open Si'.Nos.979 and 980 to an extcnt of 712.5ii s situ:rtcd at Challuru Village of Veenavarka b1, the influence of the unofficial responder I 9. as I'righly illegal, arbitrary and u 11 : conscqucntly direct tlte ofhcial respondents not to disposscss the petitioncr from lrcr r1 rn Sr'.Nos.979 and 980 [o an exLenr ()l sq r ards siruated ar Challum Villagc ol Veer \'landal, ri,ithout following tbc due process of lamus, r trvug site in l var-ds r'.an.lal ts6to ;: and :rerein en sit e 712 55 rvanl<a 2 . Heard Mr. Y.Ashok Raj, learned couns() lor petitioner, lealned AssistanL (lovernment Pleader for Re:r', nue appearing lor respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and learned Assistrr rt Government Pleader for Flome appearing for responden.- Nos.4 and 5 There is no reprcsentation on bchalf of unolT r ial respondent Nos.6 to 19

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitte(l tl-rat petitioner is the ou'ner of property bearing House No.8 i2 12 and the said propertv was gilted by her husband Ml ( i Balaiah, r,r,ho constructed said hcuse tu,elve (12) years ba ( t:. That Gram Panchavat of Chellur Village issuecl a certificate on 2

05.07.2008 (Exs.P5 and P6). That said house u,as constructed 1n Sy.Nos.979 and 980 in total area admeasuring 761.09 sq.yards. That unolficial respondent Nos.6 to 19 have been interfering in the peaceful possession of petitioner over said property and that on 15.O2.2O16, unolficial respondents barged into the house of petrtioner ald altackcd Lhe petitioner ald her husband and caused grievous injuries

4. It is submitted that an F.l.R was registered on the basis of complaint lodged by petitioner bearing Cnme No.25 of 20 16, dated 16.O2.2016 in the police station of Veenavanka, Karimnagar District for the offences under Sections 448, 29O, 323 and 506 read with 34 ol Indian Penal Code, 186O against all unofficial respondents. Learned counsel submitted that respondent No.3 is trying to dispossess the petitioner from open site in Sy.Nos.979 and 9BO to an extent of 761.09 sq.yards under the influence of respondent Nos.6 to 19. lt is further submitted that official respondents herein calnot dispossess petitioner rrvithout following due process of law.

5. Learned counsel for official respondents has submitted that it is a property dispute and that respondent authorities have not given issued any notice to vacate the open site and it i I I 3 is an oral averment made in Writ Petition arcl no documents have been placed on record that respondents L I ve ilcted

6. Heard lezu-ned counsels, Perused tL r record and considered the sltbn'trsstons

7. It is the case of the petitioner that she s in possessron of house beanng No. 8-12 12 in Sy.Nos.979 ar d 980 at B.C Colony u,itl.rir.r the Gram Panchayat limits of Ct- ellur. It is also stated ir-r thc aflidavit (at paragraph No.3) tha. the house was constructed tr'r.elve (12) years ago by her hrrs land and was subsequentll. transferrecl in her name. " te total area admeasuring 761.O9 sq. yds. A. On 15.02.2016, a complaint came to b: lodged on the basis of u,hrch an F.l.R. came to be registerec ln 16.O2.2016 against the unolficial rcsponde nts. On a perttr; ti of the P.l.R., it rs observed that the unofficial respondents r resllassed into the house, caused injuries to the writ petr t oner and her husband and abused them. The entire episot e seems to be 'r.r,ith regard to dispute of house site, as observs I from F.I.R. It defies the logic of this Court as to how on one Land petitioner stated that propert], "bearing house No.8 12i'-1, " was gifted to her twelve (12) 1,ears ago, on the other har <1 in the writ 4 affidavit, it is stated that she has been dispossessed from the "open piot" in Sy.Nos.979 and 980

9. Be that as it ma-1,, this Court is not inclir-red to deh,e into this aspect, as it is apparent that it is a dispute with respect to property and the issue is civil in nature

10. Respondents have no manner of right to dispossess petitioner from the subject property rn,ithout follor,r,ing due process of law. Nothing has been placed on record except the Gram Panchayat certificates, n'hich reflect that the r'vrit petitioner has been staying in the housc transferred / gifted by her husband. Based upon the Gram Pancha,vat certiflcates issued, the petitioner IS seekrng a direction not to be dispossessed from her open plot b1' the respondents. No record has been placed to shon, that any notice has been issued by the respondent authorities for dispossession. Respondent authorities can act only in accordance with 1aw, if the subject property is of the Government and if the petitioner is in occupation of Government property. By any stretch of imagination, respondent authorities cannot go into the aspect of civil disputes. Any action is to be initiated by the 5 respondent authorities, urrit petitioner shall bi put on notlce and follou, duc process of lalv 1 1. For reast-rr-rs aiorcsaid. this Court is of tl-r: vieu, that Writ Petition is liable to be closcd and is accordingl-'closed. Miscellaneous petitior-r s, il any are pend r Lg, shall stand closed. There shall be r-ro order as to costs ;D/. L.VIJAYA LAXMI ASI ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRI Y.ASHOK RAJ' Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE' High Court for the St rte of Telangana

3. Two CCs to GP FOR HO[\4E, High Court for the State r f Telangana at . Hyderabad [OUT]

4. Two CD CoPies. BSK TKS c-+\c I I HIGH COURT DATED:1 811112025 Co ( * 'i d.' $rA ( z I I 2 B lrB 21125 * .,l On \\- ORDER WP.No.6455 of 2016 CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 'fv i I ! i i I