The High Court · 2025

5. Mr.Md.Vajid Ali,, S/o. Not known, Aged about. Not known, Occ. Tahsildar, Kodad Mandal, C/o. Tahsildar, Kodad Mandal, Kodad Town and Mandal, Suryapet District-508206, Telangana Mobile No. 9985021494 E-mail lD. [email protected] ...RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the highhanded and illegal action of the respondents herein,despite the petitioner highhanded and ilteaal action of the respondents herein, particularly 4thand Sth respondents herein, despite the petitioner having submitted a detailed reply along with necessary supporting documents gn 06. 10.2025, in response io the impugned notice issued bythe 4th respondent'ride No.8/584/2025, dateci.19.09.2025, still 4thand Sth respondents herein threa:ening to dispossess and trying to evict the petitioner from his lawful possession, despite petitioner and petitioner family members having the physical possession since 55 years till today, in respect of petitioner's land/plot admeasurinly of 1331 Sq.yards and its equivalent Ac.0-11 gts, covered with a small residertial house, and said residential house also having a domestic power service conrrection bearing No. 4240138487 since decades, situated in Sy.No. 388, Kodad Town, falling within Kodad Municipality, Suryapet District. Moreover, the subject matter is already sub-judice before the competent Civil Court, and Learned Ci'ril Court granted an injunction order in favour of petitioner on 23.06.2025irr1.A. No. 72 of 2025 in O.S. No. 56 of 2025, which is pending on the file of the Learned Principal Junior Civil Judge at Kodad, and 4th respondent himself filerl lmplead Petition in the above mentioned Suit, and same is adjudicating, still threatening the petitioner and petitioner family members for eviction, an<l same has been illegal, arbitrary, unjust, and unconstitutional. Such actions amount to a gross misuse of official powers for pecuniary advantage, and constitute an abuse of authority as public servants. These acts are in clear violation of the petitioner's fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia, and consequently set-aside the impugned notice dated 19.09.2025 vide Lr.No.B/584t2O25, which was illegally issued by the 4th respondent, by considering the petitioner detailed reply, dated. 06.10.2025. 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 Stay all further proceedings including eviction or dispossess the petitioner and the petitionr:r's family members from the petitioner's land/plot, covered with a small reside ntial house, admeasuring of 1331 Sq.yards and its equivalent Ac.0- 11 gts, situated in Sy.No.388, Kodad Town, under Kodad Municipality, Suryapet District, having Domestic Power Service Connection No. 4240138487, pursuant to the impulyned notice dated 19.09.2025, vide Lr.No. 8.158412025, issued by the 4threspondernt, taking into consideration the detailed reply submitted by the petitioner on 06.1O.2025, in the interest of justice, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C. HARI PREETH Counsel for the Respondents No 1To 4: SRI L. RAVINDER AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No 5: -- The Gourt made the following: ORDER , TITE HON'BLE SRI JI'STICE E.V.\TENUGOPAL WRIT No.3156 of 2025 ORDE}R: 'l'his writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declar;ng the action of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in attempting to dispossess the petitioner from the land /plot admeasuring 1331 square yards in Sy. No. 3gg, Kodad Town, falling within Kodad Municipality, suryapet District (hereir,after referred to as the "subject property"), despite the pe,titioner having submitted a detailed reply to the notice vide No.B/584/2o2s'dated r9.og.2o2s issued by them, as illegal, arbitrar5r, and in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21., and 3OO-A of the Constitution of India; and consequently, to set aside the impugned notice issued by the 4tt. respondent.

2. H eard the learned counsel for the petitioner appearing online, and Sri L. Ravinder, learned. Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 2

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property, having inherited it from his father. He has constructed a small residential house on the subject land. He further submits that when certain third parties interfered with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S. No. 56 of 2025 before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kodad, wherein an interim injunction was granted on 23.06 .2025 until further orders. The said suit is presently pending adjudication before the Trial Court.

4. He submits that, acting at the behest of the defendant in the said civil suit, the official respondents attempted to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, prompting the petitioner to file W.P. No. 14297 of

2025. By order dated O2.O5.2O25, this Court disposed of the writ petition, directing respondent Nos. 2 to 6 not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property. The Court also \ \ observed that if the respondents have any claim over the t J subjec:t land, they are required to foilow due process of law, and ttrat the inter se disputes between the petitioner and the 7h respondent therein must be adjudicated in the pendirg civil suit in accordance with law. 5' Fle further submits that, in pursuance of the said order, the 4th respondent issued the impugned notice vide No.B/Sig 4 /2o2s dated rg.og.2o2s, to which the petitioner submitted a detailed repry dated o6.ro.2o2s. However, withour: considering the said repry, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are threatening to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without following due process of law. Hence, he seeks the indurgence of this court to pass appropriate orders.

6. Learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue, upon instructions, submits that the writ petition filed by the pet:'tioner is misconceived, as the respondents are currently examining the reply submitted by the petitioner on o6.Lo.2o2s- He submits that after examining the said reply, arrpropriate action will be taken by issuing notice to the unolficial respondent and a[ other concerned parties, 4 and by affording them an opportunit5r of hearing. He further submits that the official respondents have not attempted to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 7 ' Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue, and after examining the material placed before this Court, since it is stated that the petitioner has a reply dated O6.LO.2O25 to the notice issued by t, and the same is under examination by ondents, thi* Court deems it appropriate to petition with a direction to respondent the petitioner's reply, conduct a notice to the unofficial respondent s, afford them an opportunity of pass appropriate orders strictly in mention that the civil disputes and the unofficial respondent in 5 O.S. I\to. 56 of 2025 shall be adjudicated by the Trial Court in acccrdance with law.

9. ,\ccordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the misce..laneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall r;tand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- M. NAGAMANI ANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The f)rincipal Secretary to Government, Rerrenue Department, Government of Telangand, Dr. B. R.Ambedkar, Telangana Secretariat, Hyd erabad-500022, Telarrgana , 1 \ i

2. The t)istrict Collector, Suryapet District, Suryapet Town and District-sO8213, Telarrgana

3. The tlevenue Divisional Officer, Kodad Division, Kodad Town and Mandal, Suryilpet District-508206, Telangana

4. The -l-ahsildar, Kodad Mandal, Kodad Town and Mandal, Suryapet District- 508206, Telangana

5. One CC to SRI C. HARI PREETH, Advocate IOPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana. At Hyde,rabadlOUTl 7. Two CD Copies DAN BM / &l HIGH CIf,URT DATED:1711012025 ORDER WP.No.31561 of 2025 ( i\ r,ri ii!ilr ()'i zB[tBzot[ * * FlirC I.t t D!SMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOIJT COSTS S/ 'u\"