Disposed

Kothapalli Uppalaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Mar 2024WP/2664/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Writ and Civil Petition concerning disputed agricultural land, the High Court ordered the police to comply with a prior protection order, examine a new threat complaint, and follow criminal procedure guidelines without adjudicating the land title dispute.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.4 to comply with the order dated 06.03.2018 for police protection and to examine the complaint dated 21.01.2024 following Section 154 Cr.P.C.

Kothapalli Uppalaiah Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³²⁹⁶ ]

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 2664 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Kothapalli Uppalaiah, S/o Yellaiah (Late) Aged about 55 years, Occ Agriculture,

¶9

Kothapalli Rammohan, S/o Yellaiah (Late) Aged about 53 years, Occ Agriculture, (Both are R/o H.No.4-3111, Jaggaram gram Panchayat, Venkateswarapuram Village, Mallaram Panchayithi, Pinapaka Mandal Bhadradri Kothagudem District)

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Superintendent of Police, Kothagudem , Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶14

The Deputy Superintendent ofPo{ice, Sub Divisional Police Station , Manuguru Bhadradri Kothagudem District

¶15

Tfle Station House officer, Edulla Bayyaram Police Station Pinapaka Mandal Bhadradri Kothagudem District

¶16

Datla Surya Lakshman Kumar @ D. Prabhu babu, S/o Chinna Gopalam Babu, Aged about 50 years Occ. Bussiness Ry'o Kondaigudem Village Ramanujavaram Gram panchayat Manuguru Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District

¶17

Datla Kumar Babu @ D. Surya Narayana Raju, S/o Late China Gopalam Babu, Aged about 50 years Occ. Bussiness Rt/o londaigudem Village Ramanujavaram Gram panchayat Manuguru Mandal, thadradri Kothagudem District

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, Order or Direction, or any other appropriale Order one in the nature of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the official

¶20

Respondents for not providing police protection inspite of the Hon'ble Special Asst. Agent and Sub Divisional Magistrate(Mobile Court) At Bhadrachalam court orders, dated 06-03-2018 l.A.No.8g ot 2018 in lA No. 23112017 in oS. No. 25512017 in favour of the Petitioners in respect of Land in Survey numbers 560/18 Extent of Ac. 7.13 Gunts and S6Ol,l7lal2 Extent of Ac. 1.2O gunts total extent of Ac. 8.33 Gunts Situated at potlapalli Revenue village of pinapaka mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District as illegal, arbitrary in violation of principles of natural justice andin violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of lndia and also against the equity and consequenfly direct the 4th Respondent to provide police aid to the petitioners against the Respondent Nos.s to 6 and their henchmen as per the lnjunction Decree dated 06-03-201g passed by the Hon'ble special Asst. Agent & Sub Divisionat Magistrate(Mobile Court) At Bhadrachalam court orders, dated 06-03-20.18 l.A.No.88 of 2018 in lA No. 23112O17 in OS.No. 25512017.

¶21

lA NO: I OF 2024

¶22

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. 4 herein to register a crime against the respondent nos. s & 6 and others who are involved in the offence basing on the petitioner,'s complaint dated 21-01-2024, and to provide police aid to the petitioners against the Respondent No.5 to 6 and their henchmen as per the lnjunction Decree dated 06-03-2018 passed by the Hon'ble special Asst. Agent & sub Divisional Magistrate (Mobile Court) lAt Bhadrachalam court orders, dated 06-03-20.1g l.A.No.88 of 2018 in lA No. 2S1lZ01t in OS. No. 2SS|2O1Z in respect of petitioners agricultural Land in Survey numbers 560/1 g Extent of Ac. 7.1 3 Gunts and 5601171a12 Extent of Ac. 1.20 gunts total extent of Ac. 8.33 Gunts situated at Potlapalli Revenue village of Pinapaka mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. B. SHIRISHA

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.,t to rl: ASST. Gp FOR HOME

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.S & 6: SRI SRTRAM pOLALt

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

*-7'

¶28

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶29

WRIT oN No.2664 of 20/24

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

This Writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners, seeking the following relief:

¶32

". ..to issue ll/rit, Ord.er or Dir t he natu re,r " wR n o F ;;';tr:"^y. :, n"';::#: :;X' :;;

¶33

Respondents for not prouiding police protection inspite of th.e HonHe foectal Asst. Agent & Sub Diutsional Magistrate lUoOite Courtl et Bhadrachalam court orders, dated 06_03-20\8 I.A.No.g8 of 201g in IA No.231/ 2O17 in OS. No. 2SS/ 2OlZ in Iawur of the petitioners in respect of Lann in Strueg nunbers 56O/ 18 Ertent of Ac.7.l3 Guntas and. 560/ 17/ a/ 2 Extent of Ac. 1-2o wnt".s total extent of Ac.E.33 Guntas gtuated at potlapalli Reueruue u;.llage of pinapaka mandal, Bhadradi Kothagudem District as illegal, arbitrary in uiolation of principles of natural justice and. in uiokltion of Artictes 1 4 qnd. 2 1 of the Constitution of India and also cLgoLinst tlte eElity arul consequentlg direct the 4th

¶34

Respondent to provide police aid to the petttioners against the Respondent)Vos.5 to 6 qnd th datedoGos.2ol.passedr;::";ff ;;::,,'^;,'::ff^:?";:; Divisional Magistrate(Mobite Coutt) At Bhadraclnlam aurt oiders, dated 06-03-2O18 I.A.No.88 of 2018 in IA No.231/2O17 in OS.No.2SS/ 2017...,

¶35

It is the case of the petitioners that ttreir father Kothapa.lli Yellaiah, was the absolute owner and possessor of agricultural land in Sy.No.560/ l7 admeasuring Ac.l-2O gts, Sy.No.560/ I8 admeasuring Ac. 16-O6 gts, and in Sy.No.560/ l9 admeasuring 4c.9.27 gts, total admeasuring Ac.3O_33 gts situated at potlapalli Revenue Village, Pinapaka Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

)

It is further case of the petitioners that in respect o[^land admeasuring Ac.9-00gts in Sy.No.560/ 18/E, the name of petitioner No.2 was recorded in revenue records and the remaining extent of land stood in the name of their father. It is also case of the petitioners that when respondent Nos.S and 6 interfered with their possession in respect of lands in Sy.No.56O/ 18 admeasuring Ac.713gts, in Sy.No.56O/17 lal2 admeasuring Ac. l-2Ogts,^total admeasuring Ac.8.33 gts, situated at Potlapalli Revenue^{Village,their} father during his lifetime had frled a suit vide O.S.No.651 of 2009 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Kothagudem,^seeking perpetual injunction against respondent Nos.S and 6 and the said Court granted temporary injunction in favour of their father and subsequently, their father died on 17.10.2016 and the said suit stood dismissed as abated. It is further case of the^{petitionersthat} taking advantage of death of their d}tii, "g"in the^{respondentNos.5} and 6 interfered with tJreir^possession and as such, the^petitioner No.1 along with his mother filed a suit vide O.S.No.255 of 2017^on the file of Special Asst. Agent and Sub-Divisional Magistrate^(Mobile Court) at Bhadrachalam, and the said Court^{granted temporary} injunction vide order dated 06.O3.2O18^passed in I.A.No.231 of 2Ol7 in O.S.No.255 of 2017. It is further^{caseof the petitioners that the} said Court vide order dated 06.03.2O18^{passed in I'A'No.S8 of 2018} in I.A.No.231 of 2017 in O.S.No.255 of^2Ol7,has also^{granted police}

¶40

¶41

I I

¶42

protection to the pedtioners restraining t}le respondent Nos.S and 6 herein, their agents, e1 any other person from interfering with the possession artd enjoyment of land admeasuring Ac.g.33 8ts ln Sy.Nos.56O/ r8le and 560 / tZ / a/ 2, srtuated at potlapalli Village.

¶43

3 The Iearned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even after the injunction orders, the respondent Nos.S and 6 are frequently interfering with the possession of pedtioners and threatening them with dire consequences and also made attempt on the life of petitioner No. 1, which necessitated the pedtioner No. I to lrle a complaint dated 27.01.2024 on the file of respondent No.4 but till date no action has been taken.

¶44

per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.S and 6 has submitted that respondent Nos.5 and 6 are owners and possessors of land admeasuring Ac.9_OOgts in Sy.No.560/lg/a situated at potlapalli Village, pinapaka Maadal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. It is further submitted that the respondent Nos.S and 6 have instituted a suit vide O.S.No.S 6 of 2O22on the file of Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Special Assistant Agent to Government, Mobile Court, at Bhadracha.lam, seeking perpetua.l injunction against the petitioners herein and the said Court decreed the suit vide judgment and decree d,ated lg.Og.2O22.

¶45

-rirLr-

¶46

¶47

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondent Nos.l to 4 has submitted that there are civil disputes between the petitioners and the respondent Nos.S and 6. It is further submitted that acling on tJle complaint dated 21.01.2024 submitted by the petitioner and in compliance of the orders passed in I.A.No.88/2O18 in I.A.No.231l2O17 in O.S.No.255l2OI7, the respondent No.4 has issued a notice to the petitioner on 74.03.2024 and requested to submit documents relating to the property and also furnish boundaries of the property and the specific date and time when police protection is required.

¶48

A careful examination of the above arguments would disclose that there are serious civil disputes between the^petitioners and respondent Nos.S and 6 wittr regard to title, extents, classilication and boundaries of the suit schedule^properLies in O.S.No.255^of 2Ol7 on the file of Special^Asst. Agent and Sub-Divisional^Magistrate (Mobile Court) at Bhadrachalam, and O.S.No.56 of 2022 on the^{file of} Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Special Assistant^{Agent to} Govemment, Mobile Court, at Bhadrachalam. It^{is the specificcase} of the petitioners that^{even after grant of police protection order in} LA.No.88/20I8 in I.A.No.23l/2017 in^{O.S.No.255/2017} by the Special Asst. Agent and Sub-Divisional^{Magistrate(Mobile} Court) at Bhadrachalam, the respondent No.4^{has not providedpolice}

¶49

¶50

¶51

protection and the respondent Nos.S and 6 have made^{attempt on} the life of petitioner^No. 1.

¶52

In view of the above, this Court without expressing^{any opinion} with regard to inter se disputes between the^{parties,deems it} appropriate to direct the respondent No.4^{to comply the order dated} 06.03.2018 passed in I.A.No.88/2O18 in I.A.No.23l/2017ⁱⁿ O.S.No.255/2O17 by the Special Asst. Agent and^{Sub-Divisional} Magistrate (Mobile Court) at Bhadrachalam. Further, the^respondent No.4 is directed to examine the complaint dated 21.O1.2024 submitted by the petitioner and if the same^{revealscommission of} any cognizable offence, the respondent No.4 shall^followthe procedure contemplated under Section 154 Cr.P.C and a-[so^the guidelines issued by the Honble Supreme Court in lalitha Kururi us. Gouenmcnt of U.P and othersr.