Disposed

Mr. Banoth Hemoji v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Oct 2024WP/27195/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging attempted dispossession. Directed Revenue officers not to dispossess the petitioner without following due legal procedure, while reserving liberty for action under public purpose or against illegal occupation.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondents 3 and 4 not to dispossess the petitioner without following due legal procedure.

Mr. Banoth Hemoji Vs State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸¹

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF OCIOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:27195 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mr. Banoth Hemoji, S/o Late Banoth Balram, Age 63^yrs, Occ ; Agriculture, R/o Eabu Naik Thanda, Mahabubabad Mandal, Mahabubabad Dstrict, T.S.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

'1. State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Collector, Mahabubabad District, O/o District Collectorate office, lndira Nagar, Mahabubabad -506101.

¶13

Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad Division, Mahabubabad Dislrict RDO Office, Mahabubabad, Telangana 506101.

¶14

Tahsildhar MRO, Mahabubabad Division, Mahabubabad District.

¶15

Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Mahabubabad Division, Mahabubabad District.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^{may be} pleased to issue appropriate Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of declare the^action of^the Respondents in trying to illtigally disposes ne and other land owners^without following due process of law and for illegally erecting Boards in the^{landsof the} petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, unc.onstitutional and contrary to Law and Violative of Principles of Natural Justice, and consequently to direct^{the respondents to} verify the records and conduct survey and identify the lands^{pertainingto MPDO} as per their Sale Deeds and also demarcate my^{lands in Sy No. 4271817,Mm}

¶18

¶19

Ac. 1.04, Situated at Babu Naik Thanda, Mahabubabad Division, Mahabubabad District, T.S. and not to disturb my possession.

¶20

!.A.NO:1 OF 2024

¶21

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 the respondents to Forthwith consider the representations Dt 31 .01 .2023 of the petitioner and not to interfere in the possession of the petitioner in the Land, pending disposal of the main writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI THOMAS JOSEPH LLOYD

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : AGP FOR REVENUE

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.S : SRI R.CHANDRA SHEKAR REDDY

¶25

The Court made the following ORDER

¶26

t )

¶27

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LITKSHMAN

¶28

WRIT PETITIOIT No.27195 of 2024

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Sri R. Chandra^Shekar Reddy, learned counsel appear,ing for respondent^No.S. Perused the record.

¶31

To show that the petitioner herein is the absolute^owner and possessor of land Admeasuring Ac.1-04^{gts., in} Sy.No.427 /B/7 situated at Babu Naik Thanda,^Mahabubabad Division, Mahabubabad District, he has filed copy of^latest pattadar pass book and title deed. He is in possession of the subject property and there is standing crop^{of cotton.Even} then, respondent Nos.3 and 4 are trying to^{dispossess the} petitioner from the subject property without following the^due procedure laid down under Law stating that the subject^land belongs to respondent No.5.

¶32

¶33

l,earned Assistant Government Pleader for^{Revenue, on} instructions, would submit that respondent^{Nos.3and 4 will}

¶34

¶35

follow the due procedure laid under law before taking action, if any, against the petitioner herein.

¶36

In the light of the said submissions, this Writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos.3 and 4 not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without following the due procedure laid down under law. However, this order will not preclude respondent Nos.2 to 5 in taking action, if any, against the petitioner. If the subject property is required for any public purpose, liberty is granted to respondent Nos.2 to 5 to acquire the same, in accordance with law. If the petitioner is in illegal occupation of the subject land/ any other land, liberty is also granted to them to take action against the petitioner, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in

¶38

the Writ Petition shall stand closed. SD/-A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// t _-,. SECffON OFFICER

¶39

To 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, State of I elangana at Hyderabad.

¶40

The collector, Mahabubabad District, o/o Diskict collectorate office, lndira Nagar, Mahabubabad -506101.

¶41

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad Division, Mahabubabad .^{District RDO Office. Mahabubabad, Telangana506101.}

¶42

The Tahsildhar rvrRo. Mahabubabad Divisi-on, Mahabubabad District. 5. The Mandal Parishad Devetopment Officer, Mahabudb;A Dri"6;,' Mahabubabad District.

¶43

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE , High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶44

One CC to SRt TH O[/AS JOSEPH LLOYD, Advocate tOpUC]

¶45

Two CD Copies

SA LS x.,v

HIGH COURT

DATED:01nA12O24

ORDER

WP.No.27195 of 2024

DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS.

Mr. Banoth Hemoji v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Banoth Hemoji v. 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

Abdul Khadar Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Basheer Ahmed, Vs The State of Telangana

Mustari Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.J.Dhanamma @ J. Dhani Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.Rukki Bai Vs The State of Telangana

Thalla Lakshmi Bai Vs The State of Telangana