Disposed

Maroju Nagaraju v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC25 Jul 2023WP/19884/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition filed against the Tahsildar challenging interference with petitioners' possession of land. The Court directed respondents not to interfere or dispossess petitioners over the specific plot without following due process of law.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 3 not to interfere and dispossess petitioners from the schedule property (Plot No. 28 and 29 part) without following due process of law.

Maroju Nagaraju Vs The State of Telangana — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁶¹ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 19884 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Maroju Nagaraju, S/o late Laxmana Chary Aged 43 years Occ. CT Scan Technician, R/o Flat No 303, H No 20-28, Sri Sai Raghavendra Sadan, Kodandaram Ngar, Saroornagar, Hyderabad.

¶9

Maroju Sandhya Rani, Wo M.Nagaraju Aged aabout 37 years Occ. CT Scan Technician R/o Flat No 303, H No.20-28, Sri Sai Raghavendra Sadan, Kodandaram Ngar, Saroornagar, Hyderabad

¶10

..pETt,oNERs

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana. Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District

¶14

The Tahsildar, Hyathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶15

...RESPONOENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 oI lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondent No 3 in interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioners over the.schedule property i.e the open plot bearing Plot No. 28 part and plot No. 29 part admeasuring 363 sq Yds situated in Survey No 186 part, of Bagh Hayathnagar village, Hayathnagar, Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District under ward No 4, block No.9 of GHMC, LB Nagar, as illegal, arbitrary and u ncon stitutrona I and consequently direct the respondent No 3 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioners over the schedule property i,e the open plot bearing Plot No. 28^part and^plot No. 29 pafi admeasuring 363 sq Yds in Survey No 186 part, situated at Bagh Hayathnagar village, Hayathnagar, Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District under ward No 4, block No.9 of GHI/C, LB Nagar

¶17

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶19

Petilion 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 issue lnterim directions to the respondent No. 3 not to interfere and dispossess the petitioners from the schedule property i.e the open plot bearing Plot No.28 part and plot No. 29 part admeasuring 363 sq Yds in Survey No^'1 86 part, situated at Bagh Hayathnagar village, Hayathnagar, Revenue Arlandal, Ranga Reddy Dist:ict under ward No 4, block No.9 of GHMC, LB Nagar, pending disposal of the writ petition

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAJAGOPALLAVAN TAYI

¶21

Counsel for Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

I I

¶24

¶25

HON.BLE T,lRS ]USI.ICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶26

WRIT PETITION No,19884 OF 2023

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶29

The petitioners a,p[-rroachecl the Court seel<ing the prayer as follovrs:

¶30

"to issue any writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondent No.3 in interfering with the peaceful possession cf the petitioners ovei- the schedule property i.e the open plot bearing Plot No.2B parl. and plot No.29 part admeasuring -Jb3 sq Yds situated in Survey No.186 part, oF Bagir Hayathnagar village, Hayathrragar Revenue Manrjal, Ranga Reddy District under ward No 4, block No.9 of GHtulC, LB Nagar, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutiona{ and consequently direct the respondent No.3 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioners over the schedule property i.e the open plot beai'inq Plot No.2B part and plot No.29 part admeasuring 363 sq Yds in Survey No 186 part, situated at Bagh Hayathnagar village, Hayathnagar Reverlue M;rndal, Ranga ReCdy District Llnder \4ard No 4, block lio.9 of Gl-iMC, LB Naqar and tre^pleased to^pass suctt other order.^"

¶31

¶32

Learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue brings on record the written instructions and in particular relevant portron of the said written instructions reads as follows:

¶33

" It is further humbly submitted that, as alleged by the Writ Petitioners that this respondent is interfering/d ispossessing the petitioners /s purely baseless, as the petitioners herein has purchased the plots admeasuring 363 Sq. Yards in Sy.No.186 Part of Patta land which is adjacent to the Government land bearing Sy.No,195/1 situated at Bagh Hayathnagar Vilage of Hayathnagar Mandal. But, on ground the petitioner trying to encroach the Government land in Sy.No.195/1 which was handed over to the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority for the purpose of maintenance of proper greenery etc., to an extent of Ac. 10-11 gts and the work is under process."

¶34

The Schedule of property of the petitioners as per the

¶35

Sale deed, dated 11.05.2015, reads as under.

¶36

"Schedule of the Propefty:

¶37

All that^piece and parcel of the open land bearing Plot No.28 part, and Plot 29 part, admeasuring 363 Square yards or 303.468 Sq.mtrs in Survey No.186 part, situated at Bagh Hayathnagar Village, Hayathnagar Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Under Ward No.4, Block No.9 of GHMC, L.B.Nagar Circle, within the Registration Sub District, Hyderabad East and bounded by: NORTH : Part of Plot Nos.28 and 29.

¶38

¶39

¶40

SOUTH : 25 ft. wide road. EAST : Plot No.30. WEST : Part of Plot Nos.28 and 29."

¶41

The contention of the Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue is that the respondent is not interfering/dispossessing the petitioners from their land. A bare perusal of the schedule of property vide sale deed dated 11.05.2015 (referred to and extracted above) clearly indicates that there is no Government land bearing Survey No.195/1 adjacent to the^petitioners land.

¶42

Taking into consideration the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and Iearned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 not to interfere and dispossess the petitioners from the subject property i.e., the open plot bearing Plot No.28^part and^plot No.29^part admeasuring 363 sq Yds situated in Survey No.186 part, situated at Bagh Hayathnagar village, Hayathnagar Revenue tvlandal, Ranga Reddy District under Ward No 4, BIocK No,9 oT GHMC, LB Nagar, without following due^process of law. In the event, if the petitioner is encroaching any Governrnent land, it is

¶43

¶44

always open to the respondent authorities to initiate appropriate action as per law following principles of natural justice. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶45

Miscellaneous petitions, iF any, pending in this Writ

¶46

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶47

SD/-A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶48

¶49

//TRUE COPY// v./ '/ SECTION OFFICER

¶50

To,

¶51

The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶52

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District

¶53

The Tahsildar, Hyathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶54

One CC to Sri Rajagopallavan Tayi Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP For Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶55

Two CD Copies

M BC Ls'"/-

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2510712023

SIAr€
)
[2 []$ 2m
ORDER

¶60

WP.No.19884 of 2023

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶62

WITHOUT COSTS

¶63

<br>e.E
d'

Maroju Nagaraju v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maroju Nagaraju 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

Sri GajulaBhakar Vs The State of Telangana

Jadi Raju Vs Prl.Secy., Revenue Dept., Hyd., and 3 Others

Renuka Yellamma Temple, Vs The State of Telangana

Balreddy Gari Krishna Reddy Vs Government of Telangana

Thogiti Vijaya Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Avani Agri Farms Solutions Vs The State of Telangana