Rathod Satyanarayana Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Rathod Satyanarayana Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous following the recorded compromise between the parties, with no order as to costs and pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, standing dismissed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent No.2 through Proceedings No.A/290/2020 dated 29-08-2020, ratifying the encroachment of respondent No.5 and permitting him to give Acs.0.28 guntas of land from Sy.No.64 in lieu thereof, was illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India (as prayed by the petitioner; not decided, the petition having been dismissed as infructuous). +1 more

Ratio / Principle

In light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, based on written instructions from the 3rd respondent (recording the compromise reduced into writing on 11.09.2025 and the petitioner's letter expressing intention to withdraw the case), the writ petition does not survive for consideration and is dismissed as infructuous.

Key takeaways

There shall be no order as to costs, and as a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand dismissed.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (E.V. Venugopal, J.; 12-09-2025) dismissed as infructuous Writ Petition No.15737 of 2020 filed by Rathod Satyanarayana, which sought (i) quashing of Proceedings No.A/290/2020 dated 29-08-2020 issued by the 2nd respondent (Agency Divisional Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad) ratifying the encroachment of respondent No.5 (Rathod Atmaram) and permitting him to give Acs.0.28 guntas from Sy.No.64 in lieu thereof; (ii) a direction not to expand an existing path over the petitioner's land at Sy.No.2/E (Acs.1-27 guntas), Ghanpur village, Boath Mandal, Adilabad; and (iii) allotment of government land in Sy.No.1 for grave yard and dump yard and removal of encroachments, relying on a villagers' resolution dated 26-07-2020 - the action being assailed as violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution. When taken up, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the disputes had been compromised and reduced into writing by the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar, Sonala Mandal on 11-09-2025, so the cause did not survive; the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue produced written instructions from the 3rd respondent recording the petitioner's letter that he would withdraw the case. On these submissions the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stood dismissed. No precedent was cited or considered; the merits of the impugned proceedings were not examined.

[^32ee l

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY,THE TWELFTH^{DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.^VENUGOPAL

WRIT PETITION NO: 15737 OF 2020

Between:

Rathod Satyanarayana, S/o.^{LateBaddhu, aged..about.57^y.ears,occ-} Agriculture, R/o. H.No.^'l-1 , Ghanpur^{(v), Mandal Boath,DistrictAdilabad.}

...PETITIONER

AND

1 . The State of Telangana,^{repby the Principle Secretary, Revenue Department,} Secretariat, Hyderabad.

The Agency Dvisional Officer-cum-^{The Revenue Divisional Officer' Adilabad'} District Adilabad.

The Tahsildar, Mandal Boath^{District Adilabad.}

The District Collector, Adilabad,^{Adilabad District.}

Rathod Atmaram, S/o.^{Namaii, aged about 60 years, Occ-Retd., Employee,} F/o. 1-39, Ghanpur^(v), Boath^{Mandal,DistrictAdilabad.}

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of^{the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{flledtherewith,the High Courtmay be} pleased toto pass an order/orders, or issue any^{direction/directionsor issue any} appropriate writ more^{particularlyin the nature of writ of certiorari, (i) callingthe} records relating to the Proceedings^{videcase No.A,/29012O20,dated 29-8-2O2O} issued by the 2nd respondent and^{quashthe same (ii) direct the official} respondents not to expand the^{present small path in petitioner land situatedat} Sy.No.2/E tcj the extent^{Acs. 1-27guntas of land of Ghanpurvillage' Boath} Mandal, Adilabad District⁽ⁱⁱⁱ⁾ direct^{the official respondents to allot the} government land situated in Sy.No.1 of Ghanpur^{village, for the purpose of grave} yard and dump yardand also remove the encroachment^{of respondent No.Sin the} government land situated at sy.No.1 of Ghanpur^{villageand as well as the} connecting road. of 34 feet in^{between Sy.Nos'64 and 1, consideringthe}

resolution of villagers dated 26-7-2O2O (iv) consequently declar:e the action of Respondent No.2 through Proc. No.A/290/2O2O, dated 29-8:.2020. ratifying the said encroachment of Respondent No.S and permitting him to give Acs. 0-28 guntas of land from Sy.No.64 in lieu of the said encroachment is illegal. arbitrary, violative of Arts. 14,21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia lA NO: 1 OF 2020

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 pass an order directing the Respondents 1 to 4 that not to expand the existing path and interfere the peaceful possession and enjoyment of petitioner land situated at Sy.No.2/E to the extent Acs. 1-27 guntas of land of Ghanpur village, Boath Mandal, Adilabad District by suspending the operation of the impugned order Proc. No.A/290/2020, dated 29-B-2o20, issued by the 2nd respondent herein, pending disposal of main W.P. in the interest of Justice.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. S. CHANDRASEKHAR

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: AGP REP GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5:--

The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

WRIT PETITION No.15737 OF 2O2O

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari i) calling for records relating to proceedings vide case No.A/29O l2O2O, dated 29.O8.202O issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the sarne, ii) direct the official respondents not to expand the present small path in petitioner land situated at Sy.No.2/E to the extent of Acs.l .27 gantas of land of Ghanpur Village, Boath Mandal, Adilabad District; iii) direct the official respondents to allot the government land situated in Sy.No.1 of Ghanpur village, for the purpose of grave yard and dump yard and also remove the encroachment of sth respondent in the government land situated at Sy.No.l of Ghanpur village and as well as the connecting road of 34' feet in between Sy.Nos.64 and 1, considering the resolution of villagers dated 26.07.2020; (iv) consequently, declare the action of 2nd respondent through proceedings No.A/29O/2O2O, dated 2T.OB.2O2O, ratifying the said encroachment of sth respondent and permitting him to give Acs.O.28^guntas of

Page 2 of 4

land from Sy.No.64 in lieu of the said encro;a.chment as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14, 2L and 300-A of the Constitution of India.

When the matter is taken up for consid.eral-ion, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents have been compromised and the s€une was reduced into writing by the 3.d respondent/Tahsildar, Sonala Mandal on I1.O9.2O25, as such, the cause in the writ petition does not. survive for consideration. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the writ petition as infructuous.

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, produced written instructions from the 3.d respondent/Tahsildar stating that the writ pr:titioner has given a letter to the extent that he would withdraw the case before this Court.

In light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenlre, based on written instructions from the

I 1

Page 3 of4

3'd respondent, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if a.ny, pending, shall stand

dismissed

Sd/-S.MALLIKARJUNA ASSISTANT^REGI

/TRUE COPY/

SECTION^OFFICER /

To,

One CC to^{SRl. S. CHANDRA!!:KHAR'Advocate'[OPUC1} stateof reraqsana^at 2. Two ccs^{to Gp FoH iiLVenuE} Hyderabad [OUT] 3. Two CD^CoPies "Hxih''corritoitn'e BM PMK

HIGH COURT

DATED i1210912025

ORDER

WP.No,15737 of 2020

1r
(
,),l 03ti[6 r
* ,l 4...,

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTOUS WITHOUT COSTS

,r\r