Rathod Bapu Rao v. The State of Telangana

Smt. Mu.suku @ Kallem Vijaya, W/o. Late lr/ohan Reddy, Age 45 years, Occ Housewife, Rl/o. Echoda Village and Mandal, Adilabad Distrlct. ...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 a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3 respondent in not passing any orders either on the interlocutory application vide I. A. No. 01 of 2O21 or on the suit filed by the petitioner vide O. S. No. 1998 of 2021 against the respondent no. 5 for permanent injunction in respect of the house property bearing no. 5- 240 to an extent of 222.2 Sq. yrds, situated at Echoda village, Echoda Mandal, Adilabad District, as illegal, arbitrary, abuse of process of law and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent no. 3 to pass the orders on the interlocutory application or in the suit within a reasonable period, in the interest of justice. I i I lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 ro grant temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner restraining lhe respondent no.5, her agents, servants, relatives, representatives, from entering and interfering in to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the house pr-operty bearing no. 5- 240 t, an extent of 222.2 Sq. yrds, situated at Echoda viliage, Echoda Mandal, Adilabad District till the disposal of the suit pending before the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI UDAy KUMAR KUKKADAPU Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: ASST. Gp FOR SOCTAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI SOMA RAVI KIRAN REDDy The Court made the following: ORDER I I I HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT P ON No.35 27O ol 2024 ORD ER: Heard Sri K. Uday Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assastant Government Pleader for Social Welfare, appearing on behatf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Soma Ravi Kiran Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.5.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:- "...to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly a Writ in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in not passing any orders either on the interlocutory application vide I.A.No.1 of 2O2l or on the suit filed by the petitioner vide O.S.No.1998 of 2021 against respondent No.5 for permanent injunction in respect of the house property bearing No.5-240 to an extent of 222.2 Sy. Yards, situated at Echoda Village, Echoda Mandal, Adilabad District, as illegal, arbitrary, abuse of process of law and violation oF principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to pass the orders on the interlocutory application or in the suit within a reasonable period, in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this 2 Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner filed suit in C.S.No.1998 of 2021 against respondent No.5 for permanent injunction in respect of the house propertv bearing No.5-240 to an extent of 222.2 Sy. yards, situated at Echoda Village, Echoda Mandal, Adilabad District along with interlocutory application vrde I.A.No.1 of 2O2L but, respondent No.3 had not passed any orders either on the interlocutory application filed vide I.A.No.1 ttf 2O2t or in the suit filed by the petitioner vide O.S.No.199B ctf 2021. Aggrieved by the said inaction of the respondent, the petitioner filed the present Writ petition,

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.5 submits that the writ petition could be disposed of directing respondent No.3 to pass appropriate orders either on the interlocutory application i.e., I.A.No.1 of ZO2l or the suit filed by the petitioner vrde O.S.No.1998 of 2O2l against respondent No.5 in accordance trt law within a reasonable period.

5. Learned c.ounsel appearing on behalf of petitioner cloes not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on berhalf of respondent No.5. / To, ., 6 NG IN DERATI N a). The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.5, b). The fact that the suit had been filed by the petitioner in the year 2O21, c). The writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to dispose of the suit O.S.No.1998 of 2O2L on merits in accordance to law, in conformity with the principles of natural justice by giving reasonabte opportunity of personal hearing to both the petitioner and respondent No.5 within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. M_iscellaneous petitionlil any, pending s[all stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.A.V.S. PRASAD ASSTSTANT REGTSfRAR ,/ V/ SECTION OFFICER Secretariat, Hyderabad. 1 . The Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, The State of Telangana, 2. The District Collector, Adilabad, Adilabad District. 3. The Addl. Agent to the Government and Project Officer, ITDA at Utnoor, Adilabad District.

4. The Tahsildar, Echoda Mandal, Adilabad District. 5. One CC to SRI UDAY KUMAR KUKKADAPU, Advocate IOPUC] 6. One CC to SRI SOMA RAVI KIRAN REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] B. Two CD Copies BN BS !{ \ I HIGH COURT DATED:0710112025 ORDER WP.No.35270 of 2024 ; 1HE Sf4 /t ( J i 2e i,:; 'Lllh t oFSpn Caf-.O t.1 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS l. 71 lr lr{