The High Court of Telangana issued a notice before admission to respondents 7 to 22 in Writ Petition No. 13686 of 2021, concerning alleged illegal interference with petitioners' land possession.
Notice issued to respondents 7 to 22 to show cause why the writ petition should not be admitted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3168 ]
I
\
(sHow cAUsE NoTtcE BEFORE ADMTSSTON)
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO: 13686 OF 2021
Between:
.. . Petitioners
AND
.. . Respondents
WHEREAS the Petitioners above named throul;h their Advocate M/s V. BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARYpresented this Petition under Article 226 ol lhe Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order nrore particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of th€r 6rn respondent in interfering withpeaceful possession and enjoyment of thepetitioners over the land covered by survey No.362 admeasuring Ac.4.09guntas situ;rted at Turkaguda H/o.Rachaloor Village, Kandukur Mandal, Rangareddy District at tre instigation of the Respondents 7 to 22 thal too without following dueprocedure of lerw and interfering in civil disputes i.e., O.S.No.465 of 2008 on the file of the Xlll Additional District Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B Nagar, E.P.No.3 of 2018 on the file of the Vll Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B Nagar and also ROR Appeal No.A212892120'17 on the file of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur Division, Rangareddy District as illegal, arbikary and unjust and also agairrst the provisions of CRPC and IPC and also against Article! 14, 19, 21 and 300A of constitution of lndia.
AND WHEREAS the High Court upon perusing the petition and affidavit filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of M/s V. BRAHNIAIAH CHOWDARY Advocate for the Petitioners, directed issue notice to the Responderrt Nos.7 to 22 lierein to show cause as to why this WRIT PETITION should not be admittod.
You viz:
are directed to show cause on or before 02-07 -2021 to which date the case stands posted as to why in the circumstances set out in the petition and the affidavit filed therewith (copy enclosed) this WRIT PETITION should not be admitted.
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
fssue notice to respondents 7 lo 22.
Counsel for petitioners shall take out personal notice to respondents 7 to 22 by RPAD and file proofofservice.
Liston 0210712021.
ln the meanwhile, learned Government Pleader for Home as well as the Government Pleader for Revenue shall get specific instructions in the matter., I \ -,.U. ^\
Is D/- K ONESIM AssistantRegist i //TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
I l
HIGH COURT
KLJ
DATED:21l061202'l
LtsT oN 0210712021
1 Et4
o s l
xa +
ry
I L1
I
\s
c cl <br>.l l.i \
-{-J5, #'it
NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION
WP.No.13686 ot 2021
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should issue notice to respondents to show cause why the writ petition should not be admitted.
Sadu Janga Reddy
Sadu Rami Reddy
Sadu Laxma Reddy
Sadu Amruthamma
State of Telangana
Mirza Mustafa Ali Baig
K. Lakshman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
