Allowed

Basva Ramadevi, v. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC23 Nov 2023WP/23396/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 and an interim application under Section 151 CPC, the Telangana High Court restrained revenue authorities from dispossessing the petitioner from agricultural land at Mirzapur without following due legal procedure, disposing of the main petition by a stay.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed not to dispossess petitioner from land without following due procedure under law; writ petition disposed of without costs.

Basva Ramadevi, Vs The State of Telangana, rep. by its… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUST]CE J SREENTVAS RAO

¶6

wRtT PET|T|ON NO.23396 0F 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

Basva Ramadevi, Wo.Surender Goud, Aged about 40 years, R/o.Kandlapalli Village Pudur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

'1 . The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool Hyderabad.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Pudur Mandal Ranga Reddy District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondent authorities in threatening to dispossess the petitioner herein from his land admeasuring Ac.3.00 in Sy.No.124124 situated at Mirzapur Village, Pudur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, without issuing any notice and without following the procedure contemplated under the Law, as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondent authorities not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner without following the due process of Law.

¶16

l.A. NO: 1 OF 201 6(WPMP. NO:28815 0F 2016)

¶17

Petition under Section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to pass orders directing the Respondent authorities not to dispossess or in any manner interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of the rand admeasuring Ac.3.0o in sy.No. 124t24 situated at Mirzapur viilage, Pudur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposar of the main writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR VEERJALA

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR REVENUE

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶22

UIRIT PETITION No.23396 of 2OL6

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶25

"issue an appropiate Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Wit of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent autLnities in threatening to dispossess tLe petitioner h.erein from his land SA.No.124/24 admeasuing Ac.3-OO in situatefl at Mirzapur Village, Pudur Manda| RahS Reddy District, without issuing ang noti)d and u.tithout following the procedure conternplated under the Law as being illegal arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondent authoities not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner tuithout following the due process of Lau-t and to grant."

¶26

Heard Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is the owner and peaceful possessor of the agriculture land to an extent of Acs.3-OO guntas in srrrvey No.l24/24, situated at Mirzapur village, Pudur mandal, Ranga Reddy district. The said land was assigned by the revenlle-arlthorities to the

¶28

.l '.r.

¶29

¶30

petitioner in the year, 2Oe5 and the revenlre_ authorities issued pattadhar pass book and title deed. Respondent No.3 without issuing any notice and opportunity to the petitioner, is trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land.

¶31

This Court on 22.02.2O16, at the request of learned Assistant Government pleader, adjourned for getting instructions and granted status-quo. On 17.08.2076, the said order was extended until further orders. Further, the respondents have not filed nay counter affidavits.

¶32

Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos. 1 to 3, submits that the petitioner is not having any right or title on the subject property. However, respondent No.3 will follow the due procedure, as contemplated under law.

¶33

Having considered the rival subrnissions made by the respective parties, without going into the merits of the case, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land,

¶34

¶35

without following due procedure as contemplated

¶36

under law-

¶37

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶38

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

¶39

stand closed.

¶40

SD/- P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT^REGIS R

¶41

//TRUE COPY//

¶42

SEC OFFICER

¶43

To, 't. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department'^{State of Telangana'} Secretariat, HYderabad.

¶44

The District^{Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool Hyderabad'}

¶45

The Tahsildar,^{Pudur Mandal Ranga Reddy District'}

¶46

One CC to SRI^{PRAVEEN KUMAR VEERJALA, Advocate[OPUC]}

¶47

Two CCs to^{GP for Revenue,High court for the state of Telangana at} Hyderabad [OUTJ

¶48

Two CD^CoPies

MP GJP

4l{d

HIGH COURT

DATED:2311112023

1 5 oEC 2[23

ORDER

WP.No.23396 of 2016

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶57

t$t

Basva Ramadevi, v. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basva Ramadevi, v. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Shankar Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer

Buchireddy Navad Reddy, Vs The District Collector

Smt. Thouti Raja Kumari Vs The State of Telangana

S. Janardhan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Koppula Raju Vs M.Jaya Sree

Smt.Rajamani Vs The state of Telengana