The High Court directory not to dispossess the petitioner from the property until a fresh notice under Section 7 of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 is issued and an opportunity of hearing is provided.
Petitioner directed to receive fresh notice and hearing; eviction stayed until 3 months from order date.
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.
[3168 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
Between:
WRIT PETITION NO: 3007 0F 2024
Shark Khabeer, S/o. lmam_Sab, Aged about 58 years, Occ. Coolie, Rl/o.H.No. 6-352140, Ailipuram Road, Mattampaily Viilage ana UanOai, Suryrgrrjilltl
AND
'1. The State of Telangana., Fqp, Uy its principal Secretary, Revenue
...REspoNDENrs
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 an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in dispossessing the petitioner from the bearing House No. 6-3s2t4o, in sy. No. 47712, lo an extent of 110 square yards at situated Mattampalry village and Mandal, suryapet District, without issuing any notice or opportunity of being heard and without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300-4 of the constitution of India and consequenfly direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the house property belongs to the petitioner
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI LAXMALLA SANDEEP
Counsel for Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JTISTICE K. LAI(SHMAN
UTRIT PETITION No.3OO7 of 2024
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
Sri. Somu Srinivas Reddy, leamed Assistant Government pleader for Revenue. Perused the record.
4 In the light of the specific allegations, this Court has directed learned Assistant Govemment Pleader to get specific instructions from
2
WP. No.3OO7 of 2O2a
respondent Nos. 2 and i. To that effect, he has produced the written instructions of respondent No.3 wherein it is stated that the petitioner herein and others have encroached into land in Sy.No.47712, i.e., Shikam land, F.T.L of Teegala Cherum in Sy.No.56l. It is further stated that though the petitioner is claiming that he has purchased the aforesaid subject property in Sy.No.47712 and he has proposed to construct a residential house and accordingly, made an application before Mattampally Gram panchayat, but he has encroached into Shikam land i.e F.T.L of Teegala cherum in Sy.No.561 oIMattampally Village. Therefore, the notices under Section 7 of Land Encroachment Act, 1905 were served and after passing orders dated 08.12.2023, directed respondent No.3 to evict the petitioner from the subject property. It is also further mentioned that encroachers have approached this Court by filing W.P.31872 of 2022. He has also enciosed copy of the said orders. The written instructions issued by respondent No.3 along with notices areplaced on record.
J
WP.No.3OO7 of2024
Thus, the notice under Section 7 of Land Encroachment Act,l905was
not served on the petitioner.
There shall be no order as to costs
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in
the Writ Petition shall stand closed.
sD/. P 33BYf$+BRHt,EFRRX //rRUE coPY//
secrror'/kcEn
To
re angana tour i, il1t[:-'-ffis#itt**i-F.?f,je'r 5- TwoCD CoPies MBC GJP e
HIGH COURT
DATED: 0210412024
irL S f4 14-
J
6(
I (J 0 5 ,l.JN 2021 2
\ C)
,+
*
.OC :i 1,/\ I C.. ,EO
ORDER
WP.No.3007 of 2024
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION
,d
WITHOUT COSTS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether possession of petitioner can be maintained when notice under Section 7 of Land Encroachment Act, 1905 was not served on him.
Whether evicting petitioner without affording opportunity of hearing is legally sustainable.
Whether orders of eviction pending disposal of writ petition are maintainable.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SHARK KABHEER
THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS
K. LAKSHMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
