Disposed

Smt.K.Swaroopa v. The District Collector, Hyderabad District

Telangana HC12 Dec 2024WP/10674/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought to restrain the demolition of her house and directed respondents to consider her regularization application. Respondents submitted the relevant G.O. was challenged and stayed. The Court disposed of the petition, directing respondents to consider a fresh application under subsequent Government Orders.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to consider fresh application for regularization under G.O. Ms. Nos. 58 and 59 dated 30.12.2014 and G.O. Ms. No. 14 dated 14.02.2022.

Smt.K.Swaroopa Vs The District Collector, Hyderabad… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

I^s302 ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMEER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 10674 OF 2009

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. K.Swaroopa, W/o. Dr.K.Rachanna, aged about 43 years, Occ. Housewife, Flio. D.No.8-1-12417 in R.S.No.'166, Mailardevpaliy Village, Bandlaguda Mandal, Bandlagudakhalsa, Hyderabad.

¶9

C.T. and Prayer is amended as per C.O. dt. 1611112009 in WPMP.No.17292109

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . The District Collector, Hyderabad District, Nampally, Hyderabad.^- 2 The Tahsildar, Bandlaguda Mandal, Bandlaguda khalsa, Hyderabad.

¶13

C.T. and Prayer is amended as per C.O. dt. 1611112009 in WPMP.No.17292l09

¶14

..RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one rn the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in proposing to demolish the house of the petitioner bearing Door No.8-1-124171 in R.S.No.166 of Mailardevpally, Bandlaguda Mandal, Bandlagudakhalsa, Hyderabad without considering the application serial No. 2D47 tor regularization of house bearing Door No.8-1-124171 in R.S.No.166 of Mailardevpally, Bandlaguda Mandal, Ba nd lagudakha lsa, Hyderabad submitted under G.O.Ms.No.166 Revenue (Assignments, Pot) Department, dated 16.02.2008 being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and apart from being violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider the application No. 2047 submitted by the petitioner

¶16

¶17

under G.O.Ms.No.166 Revenue (Assignments, Pot) Department, dated 't 6.02.2008.

¶18

C.T. and Prayer i:; amended as per C.O. dt. 16/11/2009 in WPi/!P.No.17292109

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2009(WPMP. NO: 13665 OF 2009)

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filerd in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct the respondents not to demolish the house of the^petitioner bearing Door No.8-1-12417 in R.S.No.166 of Mailardevpally, Bandlaguda Mandal, Ba nd lagudakhalsa, Hyderabad pending final disposal of the main writ petition.

¶21

G.T. and Prayer i:; amended as^per C.O. dt. 16/11/2009 in WPMP.No.1729209

¶22

. NO: 1 OF 2015 WPMP. NO: 31682 OF 2015

¶23

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 permit the petitioner to implead the State of Telangana, represent-dd byrits Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad as respondent No.3 in WP.no.10674 of 2009.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.LAKSHMI NARAYANA

¶25

Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR ASSIGNMENT

¶26

The Cou( made the following: ORDER

t/* I //

i i i : .! I i I

/ /r

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH} WRIT PETITIO^{N No.1O674of2OO9}

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

Heard learned counsel for^{thepetitioner, learned} Assistant Government Pleader^{forAssignment forthe} respondents and^{perused the entire material on record.}

¶33

The petitioner in the^present writ^{petition is questioning} the action of the^{respondentsin not considering the case of} the petitioner as^{per G.O.Ms.No- 166, Revenue (Assignments,} POT) Department, dated 16.02.2008. \

¶34

Learned Assistant Government^{Pleaderfor Assignments} for the respondents submits that^{after filingthe writ petition,} the said G.O.Ms.No.166,^{Revenue (Assignments, POT)} Department, dated^{16.02.2008was challengedbefore this} Court in P.l.L.No.S17 of^{2013 and the safilewas disposed of} on 10.09.2O15 by the^{Division Benchof this Court on the} ground that the respondents are not implementing^{the said} G.O., in view of issuance of^{G.O.Ms.Nos.58and 59, Revenue} (ASSN.l) Department, dated 30.12.2014,^thereafter, G.O.Ms.No.14, Revenue^{(ASSN.I)Department,dated} 14.02.2022 was issued by the Government of^Telangana'In

¶35

)

¶36

¶37

view of the same, the respondents are unable to consider the case of the petitioner as per G.o.Ms.No. 166, Revenue (Assignments, pOT) Departmenti dated I 6.02.2o08.

¶38

l,earned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed the submissions made by learned Assistant Government pleader for Assignments.

¶39

In view of the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to consider the.case of the petitioner, if she makes a fresh application for regularization of the subject land as per G.O.Ms.Nos.5g and 59, Revenue (ASSN.,) Department, dated 30.12.2014 arfi, G.O.Ms.No. 14, Revenue (ASSN.l) Department, dated 14.02.2022, in accordance ^,ith law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶40

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any in this

¶41

petition, shall stand cl osed

¶42

--__----l-SD/.N. HARI ,TRUE COPY' ASSIS TANT REG TRAR

¶43

To,

¶44

SECTION FFICER

¶45

The District Collector, Hyderabad District. Nampally, Hyderabad. 2. The Tahsildar, Ra.iendranagar Mandal, Bandlagudakhalsa, Hyderabad. 3. One CC to SRt T.LAKSHM| NARAYANA, Advocare [OPUC]

¶46

' I}otf""oli"r35fro*^{ASSI.NMENT,Hishcourtror the} state of reransana at 5 Two CD Copies BSR GJP qP

ji I

HIGH COURT

DATED: 121'1212024

ORDER

'f ltt ;.1
I ( o
(-. . t.
t)
'-)
I
{I 3 r'iAS 2U5
.9

¶52

WP.No.106i4 of 2009

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,

¶54

WITHOUT COSTS (+ 2- ry^l.{ $cel-',t;

Smt.K.Swaroopa v. The District Collector, Hyderabad District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.K.Swaroopa v. The District Collector, Hyderabad District

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

N. Rama Vs The Tahsildar and Deputy Collector

A. Mallikarjuna Goud (Died) Vs The State of A.P. Rep by the Joint Collector

P.Saraswathi Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer, Keesara Mandal

Kandi Swetha, Vs The State of Telangana

Gannarapu Surender, Vs State of Telangana

K. Murali Mohan Vs The State of A.P.