Dismissed

Dara Narsimha Rao v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Feb 2019WP/2661/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a claim that respondents 2-5 erected a board occupying petitioner land contrary to a prior order, the court held the dispute regarding survey numbers and boundaries was civil in nature. The petition was closed with liberty for the petitioner to seek remedies in civil law.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to work out remedies available under Civil Law. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions closed.

Dara Narsimha Rao Vs The State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No.2661 of 2019

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

The allegation of the petitioners is that the respondents 2 to 5 have put up a Board on the petitioners site proclaiming that the land belongs to the Excise Department, and further stating that trespassers will be prosecuted.

¶4

It is the assertion of the petitioners that they are the land owners of a small extent of 550 square yards in Survey No.817/2/2 situated at Srinivasa Nagar Colony, Paloncha Town, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. The petitioners further assert that on an earlier occasion, the petitioners approached this Court by filing W.P.No.5510 of 2017 against the revenue authorities and the said writ petition was disposed of, however, taking advantage of the same, the Excise authorities are now trying to occupy the land.

¶5

Learned Government Pleader for respondents 2 to 4, on instructions, submits that the petitioners claim is with respect to Survey No.817/2/2 whereas even as per the Board put up at the site, the claim of the authorities is with respect to Survey No.817/1/3 over an extent of Ac.6-20 guntas. In that view of the matter, the petitioners cannot have any grievance. Learned Government Pleader also points out that on an earlier occasion, this Court declined to entertain the writ petition and the petitioners sought leave of this Court to workout the remedies before the competent Civil Court.

¶6

Having regard to the respective submissions, and having regard to the material on record, without expressing any opinion, liberty is given to the petitioners to work out the remedies available to him under Civil law;

¶7

wp_2661_2019 CKR, J

¶8

¶9

particularly, considering the fact that there is dispute with regard to the identity and the boundaries of the property, as the claim of the petitioners being in one survey number, and the claim of the respondents being in another, therefore, the dispute is purely of civil nature.

¶10

In the circumstances, the writ petition is closed with liberty to the petitioners to work out remedies as available in civil law. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶11

______________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶12

14^th February, 2019 KSM

¶13

wp_2661_2019 CKR, J

¶14

¶15

THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶16

WRIT PETITION No.2661 of 2019

¶17

14^th February, 2019

¶18

KSM

Dara Narsimha Rao v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dara Narsimha Rao v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Revelli Lingaiah Vs The State of Telangana

B.Tulasi Goud Vs State of Telangana

Karidula Suguna Vs The State of Telangana

I.V.Y. League Villas Private Limited, Hyd. Vs Commr, Hmda, Hyd. and Ano.

Sri Yerneni Satyanarayana Vs State of Telangana

Sri E. Madhava Rao Vs State of Telangana