In a writ petition, the High Court declared illegal the police action interfering with the petitioner's possession and directed authorities not to interfere with his civil rights without following due legal procedure.
Order directed the respondents not to interfere with the civil rights of the petitioner in any manner except in accordance with law.
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.
[32e6 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 1015 0F 2024
Between:
Ali Bin Moharnmed Bahakam, S/o. Mohd. Bin Ali aged about 42 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. H. No .1 3-1 -325, Allahbanda, Mangathbt, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more padicr.darly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actinn of the respondents rnore particularly the 4th respondent herein and his subordinates in calling tfrc petitioner to the police station, directly interfering with possession of the petitioner, asking to get original documents and directing him not to enter into his own subject land and also threatening the petitioner with dire oonsequences of imp.licating in false criminal cases, if he not obliged their order, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and in violation of principles of natural justice, and also violative of Article 14, 21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia, and conseqtrently direct the respondents not to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land bearing Sy.No.42, admeasuring Ac.6-0O Gts., situated at Bumruknudowla Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
,,
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under section 15'r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents and their subordinates not to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land bearing Sy.f,to.42, admeasuring Ac.6-00 Gts., situated at Bumruknudowra Viflage, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRI
Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR HOME
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITTON No. 1O1 5 of 2024
l
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following
relief:-
"...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more particularly respondent No.4 herein and his subordinates in calling the petitioner to the police station directly interfering with possession of the petitioner asking to get original documents and directing him not to enter into his ovvn subject land and also threatening the petitioner with dire consequences of implicating in false criminal cases, if he not obliged their order is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and in violation of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 2L and 3OOA of Constitution of India..
aia
2
CVBR, J w p _7015 _2024
.,
District, having succeeded the same from his ancestors. [t is the further case of the petitioner that originally one Nawab late Mir Osman Ali Khan was the pattadar and possessor of the lands in Bum Ruknudowla Village and in the year 1976 he also filed a declaration under the provisions of the Urban Land Ceiling Act, 1976 in File No.E1/ 10722 /76, dated O8.O4. 1982. It is the further case of the petitioner that earlier when H,M.D.A. and Municipal authorities tried to interfere with his possession over the subject property, he was constrained to file W.P.No .2052 of 2023 before this Court and this Court, uide order, dated 28.O3.2023, directed the respondents therein not to interfere with his possession over the subject property except following due procedure under law. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that even though the said fact was brought to the notice of respondent No.4, at the instance of the respondents in W.P.No.2052 of 2023, respondent No.4 is frequently summoning him to the police station and making efforts to dispossess hirn, forcibly, from the subject property.
3
CVBR, J wp_1015_2024
!
,.
any, shall stand closed.
/ffRUE COPY//
SD/-MOHD.ISMAIL ASSISTANT GI RAR SECTIONOFFICER
BSR GJ
HIGH COURT
DATED: 1110112024
ORDER
WP.No.1015 of 2024
1{e S TArE'
q
oo 2 2 JAN 202l ,},o
oEs PA1 C
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS
c/2-<br>1A
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the action of the 4th respondent in summoning the petitioner to the police station and directing him not to enter his land constitutes interference with his civil rights.
Ali Bin Mohammed Bahakam
State of Telangana
Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad District
Assistant Commissioner of Police, Rajendranagar
Station House Officer, Mailardevpally Police Station
C. V. Bhaskar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
