The High Court · 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 dispense with filing of the certified copy of the order dated 13-10-2025 including with the cause-title of parties in W.P. No. 28567 ot 2024. lA NO: 2 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 suspend the operation of impugned order of the Learned Single Judge dated 13-10-2025 in W.P. No. 28567 of 2024, pending disposal of the Writ Appeal. lA NO: 3 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 the proceedings bearing C1139412023 on the file of Respondent No. 1 herein, pending disposal of the Writ Appeal. Counsel for the Appellant: SRI BAGLEKAR AKASH KUMAR counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: SRt M. YADAGIRI, ASST. Gp FoR WOMEN DEVELOPMENT & CHILD WELFARE counsel for the Respondent No.3: sRl A. PRANEETH REPRESENTING FoR SRI P. LAKSHMA REDDY The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BTIATTACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT No.1 173 oF 2025 Mr-Baglekar Akash Kumar, learned counsel appearing for ifre appellant. Mr. M. Yadagiri, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare appearing for the respondent Nos. l and 2. Mr.A. Praneeth, learned counsel representing Mr. p. Lakshma Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.3. JUDGMENT: (Per Honble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)

1. The writ Appeal arises out of an order in writ petition No.28567 of 2024 passed by a learned single Judge of this court on 13. ro.2o25 dismissing the said writ petition filed by the appellant.

2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that a Notice bearing File No.cll394l2o23 dared 28.09.2024 was issued by the collector, Adilabad, to the appellant lwrit petitioner requiring the appellant/writ petitioner to appear in person or- through a duly authorized representative before the respondent No.l/Appellate Tribunal on o4.1o.2o24 at 3:00 p.M. at the chamber of the District collector, Adilabad for a hearing. The writ Petition was filed in october, 2024 challenging the said Notice / : : I I i t I t I t t I I I I i i ; I t t i i : , i 2 .. ii

3. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge dismissecl the writ Petition and directed the appellant/writ petitioner to appear before the respondent No.l on or before

24.1O.2025 at 3:00 P.M. The respondent No.1 was also directed to conduct the proceedings in accordance vvith law and pass appropriate orders.

4. In the impugned order, the learned Single Judge declined to interfere with the impugned Notice by holding that there is no perversity or illegality attributable to the impugned Notice dated

28.og.2024 since the rights of the appellant/writ petitioner had not been affected. The learned Single Judge further held that the appellant/rvrit petitioner's contention with regard to res judicata was not tenable as the Notice merely called for appearance and participation in the proceedings. 5:"*""'We havc heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant, learned counsel appearing lor the respondent No.3 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 /State respondents. 1 ) 3

6. The appellant/writ petitioner is the youngest of the three sons of the respondent No.3. The respondent No.3 (father) had filed a complaint dated 27.09.2024 under Rule 21(3)(a)(i) of 'l'elangana Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2oll inserted by the Amendment Rules, 2022 issued uide G.O.Ms.No.4O, Department for Women, Children, Disabled and Senior Citizens (PROG-tt) dated 30.t2.2022, before the District collector, Adilabad, containing several serious allegations against the appellant/rvrit petitioner including the alleged ill-treatment of the respondent No.3 by thc appellant lwrit petitioner and seeking his eviction from the house, factory shed and shop belonging to the re.spondent No.3. The impugned Notice u,as issued pursuant to this cornplaint.

7. It appears that the respondent No.3 had earlier liled another application under the aforesaid provision of law seeking the eviction of ttre appellant/writ petitioner from the house of the respondent No.3, which was decided by the District Collector, Adilabad, on 27.O2.2O24 in RC.No.Cl/gg4l2023 whereby, the appellanti writ petitioner was not evicted from the house of the respondent No.3 and was instead directed to take good care of the respondent No.3 and to resolve all the issues raised by the respondent No.3 regarding accommodation in the 4 house. Aggrieved by the order, dated 27.O2.2O24, an Appeal in Appeal No.Sll555/2O24 was filed by the respondent No.3 before the Appcilate Authority, Department for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Senior Citizens and Transgender Persons, Government of 'l'elangana '*,hich was disposed of on

13.08.2024 by upholding the order of the Collector & District Magistrate, Adilabad District, dated 27.O2.2O24 and permitting the parties to amicably resolve their property issues through mutual consent and in accordance with existing law.

8. The above facts make it clear that the appellant/writ petitioner's contention with regard to res judicata in respect of the earlier proceedings is wholly without basis. In any event, the.Writ Petition was filed against a Notice only requiring the appellant lwrit petitioner to appear before the Appellate Tribunal for a hearing on a particular date. The plea o[ res judicata herein is entirely based on conjectures and surmises since the appellant lwrit petitioner is presuming that the impugned Notice of hearing would culminate in proceedings of some nature or in a decision based on the same facts.

9. We are also of the view that the appellantlwrit petitioner is attempting to avoid the consequences of the impugned Notice !, I 5 whereby the appellant/writ petitioner will have an opportunity to raise all the points that were urged in the Writ Petition and also before us in the Writ Appeal. The impugned Notice.hence does not cause any deprivation of the appellantlwrit petitioner's rights or violation of the principles of natural justice in any manner whatsoever.

10. We accordingly do not find any error in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge since no rights of the appellant lwrit petitioner have been affected by the Notice forming the subject matter of the Writ Petition.

11. W.A.No.l173 of 2025, along with all connected applications, is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs //TRUE COPY// SD/'A.V.S. PRASAD / DEPUW REGISTRAR / (7 SECTION OFFICER To..1. one CC to SRI BAGLEKARAKASH KU.[\4AR, Advocate [o 2. one cc to Siii F. L-fislvrA nEooY, Advocalg roPuc] & oHILD v' 3. Two ccs to"b'p'FdB'lv9rrr1Er.lEEVer-oprrrteNT 4. Two CD CoPies ciiltt toitLEt"tJot relansana' [our] PUCI WELFARE, High BN LS YY HIGH COURT DATED:2411012025 JUDGMENT WA.No.1173 of 2025 t + J !t () i {,. r\E s)-,i 17 BLr ztili nF5p616.t'i!' I DISMISSING THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS + cCe/t \qr 6'$P