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 a writ or order more particularly one ifl the nature of writ of Mandums declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment over the Petitioner landed property Covered by !. Sy.131/AA, Admeasuring Ac.o.10-97 gts, Situated i t Muthangi Village, Patancheruvu Mandal, Sangareddy District without followir; due Process of Law as illegal, Arbitrary, unjust and also against Article 14'6,19,21AND 300A of Constitution of lndia. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 15'1 CPC prayihg that in th: circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High C() rrt may be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with peaceful poss,r ssion enjoyment over the Petitioners Landed Property i.e. Covered by Sy'31/AA, Admeasuring Ac.0,10-97 gts, Situated at Muthangi Village, Patancheruvr Mandal, Sangareddy District forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petitio i Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI KARUNAKAR REDDY Counsel forthe Respondents No 1 To 4: GP FOR REVENT E Counsel for the Respondent No 5 : SRI V NARASIMHA GC UD SC FOR HMDA Counsel forthe Respondent No 6: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER THI HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PEf,ITION No.3O789 OF 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with peaceful possession and enjo5rment over the petitioner landed property covered by Sy.No. 131/AA, admeasuring Acs.O.10.97 guntas, situated at Muthangi Village, Patancheruvu Mandal, Sangareddy District, without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary and also against Articles 14, L6, 19,21 & 300-A of the J Constitution of India

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the absolute owners and are in possession of landed property covered by Sy. No. 131/AA, admeasuring Ac. 0.10.97 guntas, situated at Muthangi Village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District. She submits that land acquisition proceedings g1e1;e initiated urr'der the Land Acquisition Act for the. I Page 2 of6 acquisition of land for the Outer Ring Ror d Junction project.

3. After inspecting the proposed lanrl;, a draft notification proposal under Section a(1) r' the Land Acquisition Act was submitted to the Projec I Director & Special Collector (l,and Acquisition), Outer Ring Road, HUDA, Hyderabad, for approval, through tetter No. 47 /LA/UE[t-VI/ORR/2025, dated 09.05.20 )6, for an extent of Ac.23.29% guntas in Sy. Nos. lOt, lO5, 1O7, 108, 1lO, 111, 1L2, ll3, rl7, l1g, 119, t22, L23, 125, 126, L27, l2g, L29, 130, 131, 132, 133, t6a, L7O, l7l, and L73, situated at Muthangi Village.

4. The said proposal was approved by he project Director & Special Collector (Land Acquisit on), Outer Ring Road, HUDA, Hyderabad, vide procr::dings No. D/ORR/7O2/2OO6, dated 11.05.2006, and was published in the A.P. Gazette ORR No. 80, dated i 1.05.2006. It was also published in rwo daily : Page 3 of6 \ newspapers itz., Deccan Chronicle (English daily) and Andhra Jgothi(Telugu daily) on 1 7.05.2006.

5. She further submits that, despite the admission that the subject property was acquired for the Outer Ring Road Junction, the petitioners are still in possession of ttre land in question and have been physically cultivating the same. She contends that respondent Nos. 2 to 7 lnave been disturbing the possession of the petitioners and are attempting to dispossess them without following due process of law, which is a violation of the principles of natural justice and Article 30O-A of the Constitution of India. Hence, she prays that the writ petition be allowed.

6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Governrnent Pleader, representing tlre learned Government Pleader for Revenue, upon instructions, submits that it is an admitted fact that land acquisition proceedings were initiated and the subject land was acquired by following the due process of law, wtrich is l I I .-:.$&+ Pagc 4 of6 not denied Uy thg learned counsel for the pr: itioners. He submits that since the subject land has b::n acquired in accordance with the law, the writ petitiorr, rs, who are presently in possession of the land witho; t any vatid tifle, do not have any enforceable right ovr:. the same. He further submits tJlat reliance pla<:r cl by the petitioners on Pattadar passbook No. TO9 ltOl7OO42 I Katha No. 115, issued by the Tahsildar, )atancheru Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, will not come o their aid, and accordingly, prays for dismissal of the r,[r it petition.

7. Sri V.Narsimha Goud, learned Stand.r g Counsel for the 5h respondent, adopts the argumen[; 6fly4n6sd by the learned Assistant Government F teader for Revenue.

8. Having heard the learned counsrl for the petrtuoners and the learned Assistant G tvernment Pleader for Revenue, and after perusing th: material placed, before this Court, since the land r -cquisition proceedings have already been completec for the Page 5 of6 \ formation of the Outer Ring Road Junction by following due process of law, this Court does not find any grounds to entertain the Writ Petition. g. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed' However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to work out their remedies, if so advised, in accordance with law' There shall be no order as to costs' As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand dismissed. SD/. M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /ffRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRI KARUNAKAR REDDY Advocate IOPUCI 2. TwoCCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

3. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

4. One CC to SRI V NARASIMHA GOUD SC FOR HMDA' [OPUC] 5. Two CD CoPies DAN TKS 4- HIGH COURT DATED:10i,1012025 ) 3o o .-] i I lllfi 7-() .,? * ORDER WP.No.30789 of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS i ii,l 1 r(r r)/ bt, "