Dismissed

Antharam Anitha v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC17 Oct 2024WP/22727/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the alleged illegal dispossession of plots by State authorities without following legal procedure. The Court directed Revenue officials to confirm that no interference occurred and stopped further dispossession without lawful process.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondents Nos. 2 to 5 not to dispossess petitioners from the subject plots without following due procedure laid down under law.

Antharam Anitha Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND IWENTY FOUR^---'

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:22727 oF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 . Antharam Anitha. Wo A [gr19sh.aOed about 3.1 years, H.No.1-2_.148, tndira Nagar, Tandur, Vikarabad oistrtt, riL"nir"r:drir'rii

¶9

2 Amruthamma, W/o [.4annap-uram Ramulu, aged about 52 years, H.No_5-.1_ 36,,1??: Rashavendra Tempte, Tandur. VLrrr11o Disrrict. Tetangana-

¶10

3 Gandla Jaqadishwar. S/o .Gandla Shivaraj. aged about 43 years, H.No.B_g_5. Momin Gaily, otd randur, vir,arjoaa oili;it-i;;,ir;, -s01141.

¶11

Pallella f(anakappa S/o Basappa, aged about 45 years, H.No.2-2_107, uarpur, I and ur. Vika rabad Distriit. fetan-g_dn3_![ 1 j a I

¶12

A Ashfaq Ahmed, S/o. Svecl Shabuddjn, aged about 43 years, H.No..l -5_1 55. I nd ra Na g a r Ta nd u r, Vii<a ra bad o istiici iE[i g:;;r";d r r + r

¶13

, -- ''

¶14

Anjilamma, W/o. ChandraiSl: 399d +gyl .q7 years, H.No.2-1_i60, Saipur, landur, Vikarabad District. Telangana_50.1 141 .

¶15

Anjilamma. W/o. Shivaooa aged about 43 years. H.No.2_.1_.16.t , Saipur, Tandur, Vikarabad Distri;i, Teta;grnr_so"if ii.^r'"'"'

¶16

¶17

Mallesham, S/o. Budioe Jangam. Shankaraiah, aged about 35 years, H.No.2_ 2- 1 27 . s aipur. rand urI vik ariuio otsti.iii' iilhiXij_Eo r r + r

¶18

o Vadla Shankar. S/o. Ir,4anohar, aged about 25 years, H.No.4_gl, Antharam Buzurg, Vikarabad Disrrict. Tetansi;;-;0;;4i"^r"''

¶19

M. Shobha, W/o. Ivl Suresh,Kumar, aged about 45 years, H.No.7-3-66. Man,yadi Bazar, Tand ur. vit<a ra oal Distrili ier"r[]ilr] so1 1 4 1 .

¶20

11.Ashraf Tahseen, D/o. Md. Ameeruddin, aged about 36 years, H.No.2_2-267

¶21

Shan_thi Nagar, Tandur ,^Vikarabad District, lelangana _SOl 1 41 .' asa o. rvana lYamyEaged a bp-u!J r-s, .no.7-1 ,illkq+

¶22

Seetarampet, Tandur, Vikarabad District, lelangana-SO1141 .

¶23

13.Bheemamma, Wlo. Chakali Malka.iah, aged about 42 years, H.No.4_2-.155. Gumasta Nagar, Tandur, vir<araojo oiitn-Eii;jlisun" _501141 .

¶24

14.Md. lmam Sab. S/o. Md_.Hussain, aged about 72 years, H.No.4-2_19512. cunasta Nasar, Tandur, vir< jriuao'oiiti;i, i#;;.."_ 501 1 4 1 .

¶25

Manqali Naqesh. S/o Venkataiah, . aged about 38 years, H.No.g_ 1O_3T11. Gadi, otd Tandur, Tandur, vikaiaba'o HJtii.i"iil;g ana_so1141.

¶26

I.i I

¶27

l6. Gousiya Begum, V//o. Syed Afsar, aged about 35^{yearsH.No1-3-211, lndka} Nagar, Tandur, Vikarabad District, Telangana-501^141.

¶28

Nazia Begum, W/o. Gousuddin, aqed about^{32 years, H.No.2-1-54,Saipur,} Tandur, Vikarabad District, Telangsha-S01^141.

¶29

18.D. Radhika, W/o. Shiva, aged about 35^{years,H-No.6-8-2111} ,^{Gandhi Nagar,} Tandur, Vikarabad District, Telangana-501¹⁴¹

¶30

'19. Pathri Vani, W/o. Somnath, aged about 37 years, H.N o.7'-1 -21, Seetarampet, Tandur, Vikarabad District, Telangana-S01^141.

¶31

20.Venkataiah, S/o.^rapayya, aged about^{46 years, 'Fl.No.B-10-64/2b'Old} Tandur. Tandur, Vikarabad District.

¶32

21.Khaja Pasha, S/c. Late Jabbar Miya,^{Aged about 45} vears,^{H.No.2-1-135,} Shanthi Nagar, Tandur, Vikarabad District.

¶33

22.C. Chandrashekar, S/o. C. Yadagiri,^{Aged about 41 years, H.No.5-4-71,} Pasari Ward, Tandur, Vikarabad.District.

¶34

....PETITIONERS

¶35

AND

¶36

The State of Telanr;ana, Rep. by its Principal^{Secretary,l,4unicipal} Administration Department, Secretariat Building,^Hyderabad.

¶37

The District Collector, Vikarabad District.

¶38

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vikarabad^{Division, Vikarabad Dislrict.}

¶39

The Tahasildhar, Tandur l\rlandal, Vikarabad^District.

¶40

The I/uicipal Comrnissioner, Tandur Municipality,^{Tandur, Vikarabad District}

¶41

Ganta Venkatram fleddy, S/o. Not^{known to the petitione's, aged about} major, Occ- Contractor,^PJo.2-2511, main road,^{lbrahimpur village.Pargi} lVlandal, Vikarabad District.

¶42

.....RESPONDENTS

¶43

Petition Under Arlicle 226 of lhe Constrtution of^{lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith,the lligh Court may be} pleased to issue a Writ Order or Direction(s) particularly c,ne in the nature of Writ of lMandamus declaring the actions of the Respondenis in^{interferingand} attempting to take^possession of the^plots belonging to^{the Petitionersbearing} plot Nos. P27,' P54,' P39,-P52,-P 53,' P 57,- PL PJ 1, P32, P 45,^-P38, P 47 ;P 41 ;P.43, ; P6O, P42, P24, P31, P63, P44, respectively, to the extent of⁷⁵ sq.yds each,ⁱⁿ Survey No.42, 43 and 45, situated at^NTR colony, Malreddicalli^{Village,Tandur} Mandal, Vikarabad District, under the^guise of the work order No.E1lEl /open spacelO1l2O23l2O24 daled- 12.O7 .2024, without any notice to the Petitioners and without initiating acquisition proceedings under Land Acquisition Act, is illegal,

¶44

¶45

I l i , I I itI iJ

¶46

arbitary and contrary to the provisions o rf Lan d Ac, o 'rcquisition Act and is in violation of Articlel4 of the constitur,"; :; ,:;,^_ nor to interrere ,,," ,n; jiol, .:l;:.;:,",,[:::"0,"^r, direct the ""o"ni"no not to undertake any kind of ::1^{,, the prots berongingto the petirion"r.} ourl """:"':":,""^learino prot Nos. p27, ps4,p3s, ps2,ps3,ps7, p7, p11,;.; ;; : i:u: ii: ;' ; ;Ij* i:f :1:1 fi^{i x; jjJ} ^ir^{::," :? : *} Village, Tandur Mandal, Vikarabad District.

¶47

LA.NO:1 OF2 024

¶48

petition Under 151 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit ,,,u0 ,r4".,,o, m: :rilT:',' ;:r,iliifi^{r;"'n : :? ;:[;:: j:} **:: ; or the work oraer No.ErlErropen space/l1/2o23,roro o,^i.Zin.:::.,:.",guise bearins pror Nos ,r, oro.":;, ;;; #:[,?"t' beronsins to the petitioners P5/ ' P7 ' P11' P32, P4s, p38, p47, P41 , P43, p6o, p42, ,ro ,,r,.,"::,^,"":' ,:'"' each, in Survey No 42,;'; ::: ;JH::"::1T,,*rv to rhe extent or ,, .o ro, R colony, Malreddipalii Village, Tandur Mandal, Vikarabad District.

¶49

Counsel for the petitioners : SRI K.AMARNATH REDDY

¶50

SffiiHffll,?Respondent^{No.1 : Gp} FoR McpL ADMN AND ,RBAN

¶51

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.2 to 4 : AG.p FOR REVENUE

¶52

Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI B.JAGAN MADHAV RAO

¶53

Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : _

¶54

fhe^{Courtmade the foltowing} ORDER

¶55

I I

¶56

THE HON'BLB SRI JUSTICB^K.LAKSHMAN

¶57

WRIT PETITION N^{0.22727 0F 2024}

¶58

¶59

ORDER:

¶60

This writ petition is filed to^{declare the actionof the respondents} in trying to take^{prossessionof} the^{petitioners over the' plots bearingNos'} P27,P54,P39,P52, P53,^P57, P7,^{Pl t, P32, P45, P.]8,P47, P4l, P43'} P6O, P42, P24, F'31,^{P63, P44 respectively, to the cxtent01-75sq'yds} each in Survey N'os.42.43 and^{45 (for short,'subject plots') situated at} NTR colony, Matreddipalli^{Vitlage, 'fandur Mandal, VikarabadDistrict,} without followin6l due procedure^{laid down under lavr, as illcgal.}

¶61

In view of the said allegation,^{this Court directed Sri R.Jagan} Madhav Rao, lea-ned Standing^{Counselappearing fbr 5'r' respondentand} learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for^{Revettue, to get specific instructions.}

¶62

Both o1' t[.rem, on instructions,^{would sLrbrnit that respondent} Nos.2 to 5 never interfered^{with the possessionof the petitiorter over the} subject plots as alleged in the^writ atfidavit.

¶63

Recording the said submission,^{this writ petitionis disposedof} directing the respo t Nos.2 to 5 not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject plots without following^{due procedurelaid rJownunder} law. In the circumstances of the case,^{there shatl be tto orderas to costs}

¶64

¶65

¶66

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if i,ny, pending in this w.it

¶67

petition, shall stand closed.

¶68

//TRUE COPY//

¶69

ASSI SD/.MOHD. T NT REGISTRAISMAIk/

¶70

CTION OFFICER

¶71

¶72

The Principal secretary, Municipar Administration Department, secretariat -^{Building, State of Telanganaat Hyderabad.} 2. The District Collector, Vikarabad District.

¶73

The Revenue Divisionar officer, Vikarabad Division, Vikarabad District.

¶74

The Tahasildhar, Tandur Mandal, Vikarabad District.

¶75

The Municipal Commissioner, Tandur [t,4unicipality, Tandur, Vikarabad District.Two CCs to Gp FOR MCPL ADMN A'ND UnenNl OeVflOpnleruf,

¶76

_^{High Court for the State_of Telangana at Hyderabad.} [OUT]

¶77

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, HiSh Court for the State of Telangana at

¶78

Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶79

One CC to SRI K.AMARNATH REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl B. One CC to SRI B JAGAN MADHAV RAO, Advocat'e tOpUCl

¶80

Two CD Copies

GJP f+

HIGH COURT

DATED:1711012024

ORDER

WP.No.22727^{of 2024}

¶89

DISPOSING^{OF THE W.P}

¶90

WITHOU COSTS.
lt-
3t .l-S

¶91

i ) ,-.- Fh-- .,-
L' It_s llil:)
',tF r-:)

¶92

!F:=hte=:--#---

Antharam Anitha v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antharam Anitha 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

Sajid Hussain Vs The Commissioner

Dalit Sankshema Sangam (Regd.) Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

G.Padmavathi Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Mekka Madina Trust for Education and another Vs Union of India ans 2 Others

Mohammed Mustafa Khan Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Faqruddin Vs The State of Telangana