Disposed

Md. Mazhar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Dec 2024WP/34936/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage, holding that serious disputes regarding the nature of land, classification, title, and ownership exist. The court directed the petitioner to approach the competent civil court for relief.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; petitioner directed to approach competent civil court; respondents restrained from coercive action for four weeks.

Md. Mazhar Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32s6 I

¶2

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

¶3

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

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 34936 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Md. Mazhar, S/o. Md. Multani, Aged about 65 years, Occ Business, R/o.H.No.2-3529/A, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad District.

¶9

,....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Represented by lts Principal Secretary, Revenue Department. Office at, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, lbrahimpatbam Division, Ranga Reddy District.

¶14

The Thahsildhar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶15

The Station House Officer, Abdullapurmet Police Station Rachakonda Police Commissionarate.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lMia^praying that^{in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may^be pleased to issue writ more particularly one in the nature of a writ of MANDAMUS under Article 226 of Constitution of lndia or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction declaring that the action of the respondents in^preventing the^petitioner from entering to protect the Register Sale Deed for open^plot bearing No. 02ⁱⁿ Sy. No. 242126, total admeasuring 246Sq. Yards. , situated at Abdullapurmett Village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. . as arbitrary, which is^patta land purchased through Sale deed and^pursuant to clarificatory orders in Letter vide No. 8l/5768/93, Dt.27.10. 1993, as illegal and voilative of Articles 14,21

¶18

and 300A of constitution of lndia and Telangana Revenue Laws^{Provisionsand} consequently direct the respondents to allow the^petitioner to construct compound wall, house over the said^plots.

¶19

I.A.NO.1 0F 2024

¶20

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 restrain themselves from interfering with the^possession and enjoyment of the petitioners^purchased Register Sale Deed for open^plot bearing No. 02 in Sy. No. 242126 lolal admeasuring 246Sq. Yards., situated at Abdullapurmett Village Hayath Mandal, Ranga Reddy District^pending disposal of the present writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SRINIVAS BOINI

¶22

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

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.S : GP FOR HOME

¶24

The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER

¶25

¶26

I I

¶27

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{C.V.BTIASKAR REDDY}

¶28

WRJT PETITION^{No.34936 of2024}

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

It is stated ttrat^{the petitioner has purchasedan open plot} bearingNo.02toanextentof246squareyardsinsurveyNo.242l26, situated at Abdullapurmet^{Village, HayathnagarMandal' Ranga} ReddyDistrict,throughregisteredSaledeedbearingdocument No.13446of2oo3,dated22.lo.20o3inapprovedlayout.Itisstated \ that disputing^{the nature of the lands, the respondentsare} interfering with^{the peaceful possessionof the petitioner stating that} the said lands^{were assignedtothe various persons} -^under Indiramma^{Pathakam.The petitioner filed the presentwrit petition} disputing the^{nature of the lands and its classilication and issuance} of the letter by^{the respondents vide proceedingsNo'B1/5768193'} dated2T.lo.lgg3allottingtheselandsunderlndirammaPathakam.

¶31

Considered the^{submissions,'madeby the learned counsel for} the^{parties and with their consentthis writ petition is disposed of at} the admissbn^stage.

¶32

Since there^{are seriousdisputes with regard to the nature of} the lands^{and its classification, title and ownershipol the petitioner} over the^{subject property,the appropriat€ remedyfor the petitioner} would be to^{approachthe competent civil Court' Therefore'the writ}

¶33

¶34

CVBR, J wp_34936 2024

¶35

petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to agitate all his claims before the competent civil Court. It is further directed that the respondents shall not to take any coercive action over the subject property, for a period of four weeks from today. No order as to costs

¶36

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶37

/ITRUE COPYII

¶38

SD/- A.SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I

¶39

¶40

ION OFFICER

¶41

l. IlP_I'ry,pal Secretary,.Revenue Department. Office at, Secretariat, State of r erangana at Hyderabad.

¶42

The District Collector, Ranqa Reddv District.

¶43

The Revenue Divisional Ofticer, lbrihimpatbam Division, Ranga Reddy District.

¶44

I $"^{Thahsildhar, Abduflapurmet_Mandal,} Ranga Reddy District. 5. The Station House officer, Abdullapurmet police statirin-Rithakonoa police Commissionarate.

¶45

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

¶46

Two ccs to GP FoR REVENUE, High court for the state of rerangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶47

One CC to SRt SRIN|VAS BOlNl, Advocate [OpUC] 9. Two CD Copies

SA PSK fr

HIGH COURT

DATED:1211212024

ORDER

WP.No.34936 of 2024

1HE S 14
,1.,,-.
,_)
17 fta zrlzs

PATC\1 €0

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

¶55

WITHOUT COSTS. (A-n

¶56

Io w \3Coh!->

Md. Mazhar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Mazhar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Punreddy Narender Reddy Vs The State of Telangana, And 3 Others

Kuntasenu Kamlamma, Vs The State of Telangana

Vaddapalli Madhusudhan and Another Vs the State of Telangana and 9 Others

M/s. Jubilee Hills Landmark Projects Private Limited Vs Telangana State Real Estate Regulatory Authority

C. Bharathi Vs The State of Telangana

Sri.K.Krishna Murthy Vs The State of Telangana