Writ petitions of 2004 challenging Urban Land Ceiling takeover orders were called for hearing twice with no appearance by petitioners even when posted for dismissal. The court held petitioners were not interested in pursuing the matters and dismissed both writ petitions for non-prosecution, without 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.
[32ss ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original J urisdiction)
IVONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVANKUMAR
WRIT PETITION NOS:20135 AND 2031sOF 2004
W.P.No.20135 of 2004
Between:
(All are R/o.3-1-69, Nimboliadda, Hyderabad)
(Petitioners 2 Lo 7 arc brought on record asper LRs of deceasedpetitioner as per Court Order dated 21-9-2006 in WPMP.No.'12046 of 2006)
.....PETITIONERS/PETITIONES2 tO7
AND
RESPONDENTS
(RR 3 to 6 are lmpleaded Per Court Order dated 1417l2l' 5 in WPMP.No.6327/2014)
Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lncl I praying that in the circumstances staled in the affidavit filed therewith, the Higl- Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly ono ir the nature of Writ of Certiorar by calling for the records pertaining the P.o, € ed ngs in C.C.No. H113766176 on lhe file of the 2nd respondent herein and ,1 rash the order dated 27 31586 passed therein as confirmed by thelst respondi) t by order dated 28, 8-2003 in his croc. Commissioner, Appeals in Proc.Nc,: . HYD/3408/86 and declare the orders therein as illegal. arbitrary and again.jr he pr6visl6nr o6,1," Urban Land ( Ce iling and Regulatlon) Act, 1976 and (;( I sequently direct the respondents herein not take over the possession of petitit rers ands in Sy.No. 73lpart and 75lA correlatrng to T.S.No. 32lP, Ward-166, Blr,r k-A cf Amberpet (V), l\rlusherabad Revenue lt/landal of Hyderabad District.
|.A.NO:1 OF 2004 (WPMP. NO: 26374 OF 2004)
Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c I )umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court nr r)/ be pleased to stay of all further proceedings including the petitioner's evict ( I from the lands in Sy.No. 73lpa( and 75lA correlating to T.S.No. 32lP, \ ard-166, B ock-A of Amberpet (V), N/usheerabad Revenue tr,4anda! of Hyderaba j Distlct in pursuance of the order dated 28-8-2003 passed in Commis;s i )ner , Appeals in Proc. No. HYDi3 407186 on the file of the 1st respondent her€ i
Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI T.BHEEMSEN & T.V.PRAt AI KUMAR
Counsel for the Proposed petitioner Nos.2 to 7 : SRI V.JITl ENDER RAO
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR LAND ACQUlt; TION
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : GP FOR ASSIGNMENl
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 to 7 : SRI C.B.SIDDHAR fH
W.P.NO: 20315 OF 2004
Between:
AND
1
1 0. Tahsildar. Am berpet lvlandal, Hyderabad District
(Respondent Nos. 8 to 10 are impleaded as per Court( rder dl. 12.06.2024 in l.A.No.1/2023).
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lnJ a praying that in the circumstances staled in the affidavit filed therewith, thrr High Court may be pleased to issue ar order or direclion more particularly ore 1 the nature of writ of Certiorari by calling for the records pertaining to the Pr'r :eed ings in C.C.Nos. H1/3805/76 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein anc quash the order dt. 27.3.1986 passed therein as confirmed by the'1st res t cndent by order dt. 28.8.2003 in his proc. Commissioner, Appeals in Proc.N r s. HYD/3407/86 and declare the orders therein as illegai, arbitrary and against the provisions of the Urban Land Cei ing and Regulation) Act, 1976 and <;r r sequently direct the respondents herein not take over the possession of petitioners lands in Sy.No.73/part and 75lA correlating to T.S.No.32lP, Ward- I i6, Block-A of Amber Pet)V), lt4ushee:abad Revenue [t/andal of Hyderabad Dist:i:
l.A.NO:2 OF 2004(WPMP. NO: 26602 0F 2004)
Petition Under Sectron'1 51 CPC praying that in the ci :umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court rr ry be pleased to stay of all further proceedings including the petitioner's evicti( n from the lands in Sy.No.73lpart and 75lA correlatrng to T S No.32lP, rv rrd-166, Block-A of Amberpet (V), Musheerabad Revenue lr.4andal of Hyderabac District in pursuance of the order dt. 28.8.2003 passed in Commissioner, ,\ rpeals in Proc. No. HYD/3407/86 on the file of the 1st respondent herein pend r g disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI T.BHEEMSEN & T.V.PRp,l AI KUMAR
Counsel for the Proposed petitioner Nos.2 to 7 : SRI V.JIIl ENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR LAND ACQUI.S TION Counsel for the Respondent No.3 to 5, 11 to 13 : GP FOR F EVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 10 : SRI C.B.RAM MC HAN REDDY The Court made the following COMMON ORDER
l
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION Nos.2O135 & 20315 of 2OO4
COMMON ORDER:
When the matters are taken up for hearing on 22.08.2025 therc \ras no appearance on behalf of the petitioners Accordinglr,. Lhe matters u-cre directed to be posted under the capLion for "dismissal" on 25.O8.2025- But at thcir request on 25.O8.2025, the matters rrere adjourned to 28.08.2025 under thc same caption. Evcn toclav, there is no appearance on behall of ti're petitioners either in the virtuai mode or in the phy.sicai modc, though the matters are posted under the caption 'for dismissal'. It appears thar thc pctitioners are not interested ir-r pursuing the matters
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in these petitions, if aly, sha11 stand closed
SD/H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR SISTANT REGIS
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
3 Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the S.; te of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 4 One CC to SRI T BHEEMSEN & T.V.PRANA| KU|VAF, Advocare [OpUC] 5 One CC to SRI C.B.RA[V IVOHAN REDDY, Advocate { )pUCl 6 One CC ro SRI V.JITHENDER RAO. Advocate [OpU( ] 7 One CC to SRI C B.SIDDHARTH, Advocate (OpUC) 8 Two CD Copies
SA BS
HIGH COURT
DATED:01 10912025
COMMON ORDER
WP.Nos.20135 AND 20315 of 2004
I n- J Irii
i
.l rl
I 5 R
ooa {,',
*
A:)
--i '
DISMISSING THE BOTH WRIT PETITIOIIS FOR NON_ PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS.
)
J,
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Roop Lal Singh & others
Vittal Singh & others
The Commissioner of Appeals, Office of the Chief Commissioner Land Administration
Special Officer & Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad
Mudari Parasuram & others
N.V. Shravan Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
