The High Court dismissed a writ appeal challenging the refusal to issue a direction to authorities to decide representations regarding agricultural land. The court held that the relevant section of the Telangana Municipalities Act offers no enabling provision or corresponding duty to decide such representations.
The Writ Appeal is dismissed with no costs.
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.
13446l
-:
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF IMARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT APPEAL NO: 97 OF 2025
Writ Appeal under clause't 5 of the Letters Patent against theOrderdated 2311212024 in W.P No. 36033 of 2024 on the file of the High Court.
Between:
Koshika Raju, S/o Mallaiah Aged about 32years, Occ. Agricuture,Rl/o H, No4- 105161 4, Sriiamnagar Colony, Turkayamjal Municipality, AbdullapurmetMandal,R.R. District.
...APPELLANT
AND
...RESPONDENtS
it:
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
' Petition unc er Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstzrnces stated in the affidavit filed in 's.rpport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the official Respondents to take necessary action on the layout of the Respondents No. 6 tr 9 in respect of Petitioner's agriculture land Ac. 0-10gts in Sy no. 242|EEE ;ituated at Turkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet mandal, R. R. District.
Counsel for the Appellant : SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR
Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SMT.D.MADHAVI, SC FOR HMDA
Counsel for the Respondents No3&5: a#rH_tt'rHAR REDDY KATRAM, counser for the Respondents No.4: s|,rt#ilt'fi[,[il,Ho*',
Counsel forthe Respondent No.6tog :
The Court made tlre following: JUDGMENT
\ \
THE HON,BLETHE ACTING CHIEF WSTICESUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE RDNUKA YARA
WRIT APPEALNo.97 of 2O25
JUDGMENT(Perthe Hon'blethe ActingChiefJusticeSujog Paul)" Sri Rapolu Bhaskar,learned counsel for the appellant ald Sri K.Laxmaiah,learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4.
'1zooz1a scc ola
2
Kishan San.ghDistrict Bhind v. Union of Indiaz'Municipal Corpn. of GreaterMumbaiv.RafiqunnisaM'Khalifa3 and Indore DevelopmentAuthority & Anr' V' Sansar Publication Rrt. Ltd.4).
5 In 1.he instantcase,despite repeated querl fromthe Bench, lezr:rerlcounselfor the appellant could not point out any statutorypt ov'.r;ionwhichenablesthe appellant to pr':fer sucha representat onand puts a corresponding duty on the authorities to decide it. S,rb-section(15) of Section 172 ot the Act is not pregnant u'ith any suchenabling provisronoffiling appeal/ rep'-esentationnor does it cast any duty on the authority to entertairL anddecidesuch representation.No othcr provision is brought Lo,tur notice' Thus,we find no reason to interfere in this appeal.
No costs. 6 Ac< or<lingly, this WritAppeal is dismissed.
Inr,erlc cutory applications,ifany pending,shall also stand close d.
To,
SD/.I. NAGA LAKSHMI STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 0\Y
t/
BSK
BS
/
,
HIGH COURT
DATED:07lA3l?.025
\ \
JUDGMENT
WA.No.97 ot 2025
i ,r ,1F g14
/i,
((f'
{,- 17 AP q x[i
.2 trz
.i. v
.11rr,..,,\i.- '' lH(:C *
DISMISSINGi THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS
/3 //1 5 tl /s /A
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can issue a writ of mandamus directing authorities to decide representations filed by the appellant.
Whether Section 172 sub-section (15) of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019, creates a duty on authorities to decide such representations.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Koshika Raju
State of Telangana
Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority
District Collector, Ranga Reddy District
Turkayamjal Municipality
Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal
Sujay Paul
Renuka Yara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
