Dismissed

Smt Manuka Mallamma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Dec 2023WP/33907/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court heard a writ petition challenging delay in disposal of an appeal regarding land admeasuring Ac. 3.16 Gts. in Sy. No. 205, Narsingi Village, and incidental petitions to curb land grabbing. The petitioners raised issues of delay, potential illegal land occupation by other respondents, and sought registration of criminal cases. The Court expressed no opinion on the service of a specifi

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed without further orders; miscellaneous petitions pending stood closed; no order as to costs.

Smt Manuka Mallamma Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 33907 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt Manuka Mallamma, Wo Late Ir4. Balaiah, Aged about 72 years, Occ. Housewife, Rlio H.No.4-48, Narsingi Village, Rajendernagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy Districl,

¶9

Mr. Srinivas, S/o: Late [/. Balaiah, Aged about 48 years, Occ. Business, R/o H.No.4-48, Narsingi Village, Rajendernagar lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District,

¶10

Mr. Srisailam, S/o: Late M. Balaiah, Aged about 46 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o H.No.4-48, Narsingi Village, Rajendernagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶11

Smt Jyoshna lrlanuka, Wo: Late Venkatesh Manuka, Aged about 34 years, Occ. Housewife, Rl/o H.No.4-48, Narsingi Village, Rajendernagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

1 The State of Telangana, rept., by lts Principal Secretary Revenue Department Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶15

2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, lntegrated District Office Complexes, Kongara Kalan Village, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana-50'l 51 0.

¶16

3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajendranagar Division, Ranga Reddy District.

¶17

The Tahsildar, (MRO), Gandipet [Vlandal, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District

¶18

The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Metropolitan Police, Gachibowli, Cyberabad.

¶19

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad lvletropolitan Police, Shamshabad Zone, Gachibowli, Cyberabad.

¶20

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Metropolitan Police, Rajendranagar Division, Shamshabad Zone, Gachibowli, Cyberabad.

¶21

¶22

The Station House Officer, Narsingi police Station, Narsingi, Ranga Reddy District.

¶23

lM/s Vamsiram Builders and Developers pvt. Lt$., Rept., by its Managing Director, Shri Subba Reddy, having'office ai, d6''ftoor. Vamsiram Jvothi Lorv^en, Rd No. 45, Nandaliri Hilsiubitee t_lit[, HvJ.ii6r'o'i;dffi;;' 500033.

¶24

10.Sri T.K Mohan Reddy, S/o: Late K Gatta Raddy, Aged about 72 years, Occ.. Agriculturist, R/b My Home Vavadweefa'npa"rtments, fe;sJllJ, ' Madhapur, Hyderabad.

¶25

Sri Katta Shivaorasad Reddy, S/o: T.K Mohan Reddy, Aged about 39 years, Hyderabad.occ. Business.' Rr/o rVtv 'tomli^{vauai*LeJi' npriiiHt", Grr i 5: M;iilp-ir,}

¶26

12.Sri P. Sudhakar Reddy, S/o: Laxma Reddy, Aged about. 58 years, occ. Agricutture, R/o piot No.122tis, trd;;hiE;eili, viltagel eai'oipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶27

13.Sri P. Ramesh, S/o: p Srihari Rao, Aged about 59 years, Occ. Govt. Employee, Wo 12-12-94, Ravindranigar, Sitf,ipnjfhandi, Secunderabad_ 50006't.

¶28

14.Smt M. Rani Adilaxmi, W/o: Veera Raju, Aged about 63 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o 2-1 96, vaninagi'r,'viir<a;gi;ilivaelaoaolsooo+2.

¶29

15.Sri tvlekala Veerender Reddy, S/o: Ram Reddy, Aged about 48 years, occ. Fushess, R/o H.No..6-77, Crrurcrr cattv, tiarsingi Viilige, <jr"Jip"t Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶30

...RESPONDENTS

¶31

Petition under Articre 226 ot the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents herein particurarry respondent No. 2 herein in causing in-exorbitant deray in disposing of the Appear No. cr2912t2o19 fired against order dated 09-05-2019 passed in proc No. Bt4o1t2o1g, with respect to land admeasuring Ac 3-16 Gts., in sy. No. 20s, situated at Narsingi viflage, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State, allowing / entertaining the rand grabbing activities of respondent No. 9 to 12 on part of the above mentioned rand without any resistance by respondent No. 2 to g inspite of complaint dared 01-12-2023, 02-12-2023 and 06-12-2023 as highry iilegar, arbitrary, violation of petitioners fundamentar rights, in consequence direct the respondent No. 2 herein to dispossess of the Appear No. cr2g12r201g fired against order dated 09-05-2019 passed in proc No. Bt4o1t2o1g, further direct the official respondents to curb the rand grabbing activities over rand admeasuring

¶32

('9

¶33

Ac 3-'16 Gts., in Sy. No.205, situated at Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana state which is subject matter of case No. c1291212019 pending on the file of rhe court of rhe special rribunal Ranga Reddy District.

¶34

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶35

Petition under section^'l s'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the official respondents herein to stop the land grabbing activities / construction actlvities over land admeasuring Ac 3-16 Gts., in sy. No. 205, situated at Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana state pending disposal of the main Writ petition.

¶36

lA NO: 2 OF 2023

¶37

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 to direct respondent No. 5 to 8 herein to act upon the complaint dated 01-12-2023, 02-122023 and 06-12-2023 by registering criminal case against respondent No. 9 to 15 pending disposal of the main Writ petition.

¶38

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRt MIR MUKARRAM ALI

¶39

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶40

Counsel for the Respondent No.s to 8: Gp FOR HOME

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent No.10 and lZ lo 1i--

¶42

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 1: SRI C. NARESH REDDY

¶43

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶44

,'.]

¶45

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITI ON No.3 3907 of o23

¶46

ORDER:

¶47

The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondent No.2 in causing exorbitant delay in disposing of the Appeal No.C/29L2/2Ot9 filed against order dated 09.05.2019 passed in Proc.No.8/40112019 with respect tc the land admeasuring Ac.3.16 guntas in Sy.No.205, Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶48

Learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue has placed on record order dated 24.11.2022 in Case No.C/2gL2/2OLg (RDO)-Case No. ST/D 1/190 B/2O21 u.,herein the appeal filed by the petitioner No.1 has been rejected.

¶49

However, it is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the said order has not been served on the petitioners. This Court is not inclined to express any opinion on that point.

¶50

In view of the same, no further orders are required to be passed in the writ petition.

¶51

The writ petition is closed. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶52

sD/- c. PRAVEEN KUFTAR \ ASSTSTANT REGTS/RAR \ //TRUE COPY//

¶53

<U, SECTION OFFICER

¶54

To,

¶55

One CC to Sri Mir lVlukarram Ali, Advocate tOpUCl

¶56

¶57

ar\

¶58

?. 9n"^{CCto Sri Naresh Reddy,} AdvocatelOpUCl 3. Two CCs to Gp for Revenu6, High b;;h f;t-nl strt" of Tetangana, at Hyderabad [OUTI

¶59

1. L*S CCs to- Gp for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUTI-

¶60

1. Two CD Copies

¶61

TJ GJ

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 11212023

ORDER

I t\g STAI4.
)
q
d oBJAtl?02[
.1.-
+
* oEsPATcr$fi

¶66

WP.No.33907 of 2023

¶67

CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION

¶68

WITHOUT COSTS,

¶69

I 7ro

Smt Manuka Mallamma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Manuka Mallamma 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Vankayyala Sailu Vs State of Telangana

Arepally Durgamma Vs The State of Telangana

Shree Manjunatha Constructions Vs The State of Telangana

Thammala Srinivas Vs Kalvakuntla Chandrashekar Rao

Smt.Siriga Satya Bai Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Samudrala Jagathaiah Vs The State of Telangana