The High Court · 2025

4. The Tahsildar, Bhongir lVandat, Telangana State. 5091 16 5- The Deputy Tahsildar, Bhongir firlandal, Telangana State. 50g1 .16 6. The Revenue lnspector, Bhongir Mandal, Telangana State. 50g.1 16 Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ or any other appropriate writ, order, in the nature of a writ ...RESPONDENTS of Mandamus, to.

1. Declare that the continued refusal to grant financial assistance and ex gratia relief to the Petitioners is wholly i egal, arbitrary, rrrational, and misconceiveo, as the saici cienial is based on a status quo order pertaining solely to crvil title disputes, whereas the petitioners' claim arises from natural disaster relief, which is entirely independent of tiUe. Denral of such relief on vague, irrelevant, and unlaMul grounds constitutes gross administrative malfeasance and is in blatant violation of Articles 14, 19(t )(g), and 21 of the Constitution of lndia.

2. Direct Respondent No. 2 to forthwith rerease the compensation under the Natural calamrty Rerief Fund (NCRF)/state Disaster Response Fund (sDRF) and provide the ex gratia rerref as decrared by the Government of Telangana, rn respect of the damages suffered by the petitioners to their agricultural lands, crops, rivestock, and dairy farm caused by the naturar calamity on 02.os.202s, and to provide such financiar assistance, compensatron, and ex gratia as the petitioners may be erigibre for, based on the inspection report submitted by Respondent No.6, in accordance with the procedure and norms of the Government. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct to Respondents, particularly Respondent No. 2, to consider the inspection report submitted b Respondent No.6 and provisionally release the eligible financial assistance, compensation, ex gratia relief under the Natural Calamity Relief Fund (NCRF)/State Disasler Response Fun (SDRF) scheme to the Petitioners, subject to final adjudication of this Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI MOHAMMAD IMTIYAZ PASHA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI L. RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER T}IE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUCIOPAL WRIT PETITION No.31 57O of 2O2S ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not granting hnancial assistance and ex gratia relief to the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary', and in violation of Articles 14, 2l , and, 300-A of the Constitution of India, arrd consequently, to direct the respondents to release the hnalcial assistance, compensation, and ex gratia amount based on the inspection report submitted by the 6th respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners appearing onlint-. and Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the lst petitioner is the widow of late Mohammad Abdul Raheem; petitioners 2 to 5 are her children; and petitioners 6 to 8 are the vendees who purchased certain portions of the lald lau.fully from the lst petitioner arrd her children. 2 He submits that the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of lald measuring Ac.17.34 gts in Sy.No.722, Ac.11.07 gts in Sy.No.723, and Ac.17.12 gts in Sy.No.724, situated at Bhongir Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District, totaling Ac.46.25 gts. Out of this, an extent of Ac.5.00 gts has been sold to petitioners 6 to 8.

4. He further submits that due to severe rains and windstorms on the night of O2.O5.2O25, the crops and cattle sheds on the said land were badly affected. Accordingly, the petitioners made a representation on

03.05.2025 to the Revenue Department seeking compensation under the Natural Calamity Relief Fund (NCRF)/State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF). Pursuant to the same, the Revenue Inspector inspected the site and conducted a panchanama in the presence of the petitioners ald their u.orkers.

5. In response to the petitioners' representation, the 5th respondent issued a reply dated 25.O7.2O25, which was received by the petitioners on 05.09.2O25, stating as follows: 3 "It is -further submitted that uith respect to the lands in Suruey Nos.722, 723, and 724 of Bhongir uillage outskirts, there eists a d,ispute between the applicant and tLte Si Lakshmi Narasimha Swamg Plot Owners, Association and others. In uiew of the status quo ord_ers passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana, Hgderabad, in W.P.No.285B3/202 l, it is not possible tct sanction financial assistance from the Gouernment. The same js Lrcrebg infonned, for gour kind infonnation. "

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the status quo order passed by this Court pertains solely to a civil dispute and has no bearing on the petitioners' claims for retief under the NCRF or SDRF. He also submits that neighboring landowners have been extended financial assistance; however, the petitioners have not been granted any compensation. As such, he seeks the indulgence ol this Court to pass appropriate orders.

7. On the other hand, Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, upon instructions, submits that as per the revised list of items ald norms of assistance under the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRFI 4 and the National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF), communicated through Letter No. 33- 02 / 2O2O -NDM-I dated

11.07.2023 from the Ministry of Home Affairs (Disaster Malagement Division), Government of India, financial assistance under Item No.10 is admissible only for houses and cattle sheds that are attached to houses, ald such constructions must be authorized. He submits that the petitioners' request pertains only to a cattle shed, which is not attached to a residential house. Hence, their request was not considered eligible for financial assistance under the NDRF/SDRF. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

8. Having heard the Iearned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, and upon examining the material placed before this Court, since the request of the petitioners for hnarLcial assistance has been rejected and the disputes between the petitioners herein and the respondents in W.P. No. 28583 of 2O2l are pending adjudication before this Court, this Court deems it appropriate to grant liberty to the 5 petitioners to make a detailed representation, along with necessary documents to establish that the construction in question is authorized and situated at the subject property. Upon such representation being made, the competent authority shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible "

9. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There sha-11 be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. To SD/ H . GOWRI SHANKAR TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Departm State of Telangana, Secretariat Hyderabad, Telangana ps and Registration),

2. The District Collector, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, Telangana State. 508116 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhuvanagrri Division, Telangana State. 5081 1 6

4. The Tahsildar, Bhongir firlandal, Telangana State. 5081 16 5. The Deputy Tahsildar, Bhongir Mandal, Telangana State. 5081 '16 6. The Revenue lnspector, Bhongir Mandal, Telangana State. 508116 7. One CC to SRI IMOHAMMAD IIMTIYAZ PASHA, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

9. Two CD Copies (J MP GJP HIGH COURT DATED:1711012025 lHE S tA ( \) o t * 2 3 ilAR 2r}26 z sn.rrcr,4 * ORDER WP.No.31570 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS oA LP(. il, w' ,.r\S