K. Suresh Kumar v. The State of Telangana

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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the inaction of the 2nd respondent in not conducting the survey demarcation as per the request of the petitioner for su rveyld ema rcation/id entification of the land in Sy.No.152 as against the land in Sy.No.'l 50 of Boduppal village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkaigiri District, is arbitrary and illegal and direct the 2ndrespondent to fo(hwith conduct the .survey demarcation of the land in Sy.No.152 as against the land in Sy.No.150 of Boduppal village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District and issue public copy of the same to the petitioner and direct the 3rd respondent not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land in Sy.No.152 of Boduppal village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cr: :umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Corrr may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to forthwith conduct survey/ de,r a rca tio n/id en tificatio n of the land in Sy.No.152 and the land in Sy.No 150 of Bocrl pal vil{age, Ir4edipally I\,4andal, tt/edchal - Malkajgir District and issue public cop,r of the survey report, plan and panchanama to the petitioner, pending disposal of lte writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S. BHARADWAJ ASSOCIAT: S Counsel for the Respondent No.1,2,4 & 5: SRI L. RAVINDE:l l, ASST. GP FOR F EVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI FARHAN AZAM KFr ,N, SC FOR TSWB The Court made the following: ORDER o THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.33394 of 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the lollowing relief: "...to issr.le a Writ of Manclamlrs dcclaring the inactron oI the 2"d respondent in not con(lucling tlie sLll\'c\ demarcation as l)etitioncl for su.vey/ per the request o[ clemarcation/ iclentification of tlv lartcl in 51,.No.152 as against the land in Sv.No. I 50 oi llotluppal r illage, Medipallr' Manclal, Medchal Malkalgiri Drslnct is arbrtrary and illegal and clirect the 2"'r respondcrl lo [orti]\\ittr conduct the survey demarcation of thc lan<l rr 51 .No l-52 as against the land in Sy.No. 150 ol Bocluppal vrllage, Merclipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgin Disrrict arrrl rssLre pttblrc copr oI the same to the petitioner ar)d drrecl lltc 3"rrespondent not to interfere rvrth thc possessiort and crUo]'nrent of the petitioner over the land in Sy.No. 152 ol llocluppal village, Medipally Mandal, Medchat Malkqgiri Distn('t.. . "

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Farhan Azam Khan, learned Standing Counscl for the Telangana State Waqf Board, appearing for respondent No.3 and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4and5 Perused the materials.

3. Appearing online, Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, leaned senior counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of land to an extent of Ac.5.O0 guntas in Sy.No.152 of Boduppal Village, Medipally 2 Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District. Ht' vould further submit that respondent No.3 Waqf Boarcl i ; claiming thc land in Sr.'. No. I 50 of Boduppal village lr irn cxtent of Ac.18.32 guntas as per Waqf Gazette Notili, iLtion be:zu-ing No.6A, dated 09.02.1989 at S1.No.2749, btv name Shia Mosque. Therefore, the petitioner made an tpplicaLion to respondent No.2 with a request to show thr :oundarics of his Sy.No.152 by paying necessary challirr as required under lalv. Based upon such applicatior-r, Lre impugned memo has been issued uide Memo Rc.No , ')./387 l2o2r, dated 07.04.2O25 by respondent No.2 seekin 1 to submit the required documents pertaining to the title ,r' the petitioner including that of the pattadar passbook, ; lest pahani/ dharani records to the office of respondent \r .2 rvithin (10) days lrom the date of receipt of that memo. n due course of time, the petitioner could not submit the required information as sought for by respondent No. L Her-rce, he would seek a direction to respondent No.1l o accept the plea of the petitioner by enclosing the said inlrrmation and to act upor-r the memo issued by respondent I r .2. (i 3

4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the Telalgana State Waqf Board, appearing tbr respondent No.3 would submit that thc petitioner has not succeeded in the earlier round of litigations r",r.'here the matter has been rcached finatity before thc Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Admittedly, respondent No.3 is holding land in S_r'.No.150 to an extent of Ac.18.32 guntas as per the Gazette Notification bearing No.6A, dated 09.O2.1989 at S1.No.2749 in Hyderabad Taluk, Boduppal village. He n ou ld further submit that if any action has been taken b_v respondent No.2 in terms of the impugned memo, the valuable right of the petitioner shall be effected. Hence, he would seek dfrection to respondent No.2 to issue notice to the petitioner as well while taking any action in accordance with the said memo.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader lor Revenue would submit that no action is required to be taken by respondent No.2 until the documents sought from the petitioner are furnished by him u,ithin stipulated ten days time. He would further submit that, based upon the 4 petitioner's application dated 18.03 .2025, t:n da1's time was grantccl to him, therefore respondent \o.2 has not initiatcd alnv proccedings. The petitior r r inste:rd of providing thc rcquircd information to respor( t'nt No.2, has approachcd this Court under misconcept,i: r. Flence, he ri,ould secl< to dismiss this writ petition.

6. Having heard learned senior courr sel for the petitioner. learned Standing Counsel r rpezrring lor respondent No.3, learned Assistant Governrnr nt l)leader for Revenue and upon perusal of the mater,i I betbre this Court, mo rc particularly the impugned menlo uid.e Rc.No.A2/387 12025, dated 07.04.2025, r'r,ir:re ten days time has bccn given to the petitioner to furni:; i Ll-rer required documents to the office of respondent Ncr this Court deems it iippropriate to direct respondent No 2 to consider the infornration to be furnished by the pc t tione r herein within a pcriod of fifteen (15) days from ther r ate ol receipt of a copy ol this order for further examinat r rr. Howeve r, respondent No.2 is further directed to issut notice to the petitioner, respondent No.3 and all other intr: ested parties 5 including that of the Waqf institutions and by granting sufficient opportunity of hearing on the said aspect and take necessary steps strictly in accordance r'r'i th lau' for conduct survey in terms of the circulars issued bv the authorities of Survey and Land Records and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible

7. With the above directions, this writ petition IS disposed of. There shall be no order as [o costs Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed S D/-A.V.S. PRASAD PUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To, I 2 J

4. 5 o 7 I o Tha Princioal Secretary' Revenue - Survey Department' The State of iHslt[ii,"3l:::i:* Ji,'*:f lfiS Land Reco rd s, Med ch a I - Markais i ri littlii'*';:iftT8?":"T'r.?i[rilg:rstateWaqrBoard'HaiHouse' ff#u[$m*,ganm's**r*'r*'1ru;-: touTl two CD Copies BN BS HIGH COURT DATED:0411112025 \ t ORDER WP.No.33394 of 2025 STA )( q o i) \ ', ". at |'-/t . \.1.- t 11 0t[, 2tr5 * I n.. -:i 1>.l.r(..' .rii DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS bl \q w-