Dismissed¶30

Harijana Rajanna, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Jul 2025WP/21259/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissed as withdrawn without costs; liberty to avail alternative remedies; writ of mandamus; inaction of revenue authorities in considering representations dated 29.04.2021 and 11(21).12.2024; 5.00 acres in Sy.No.241, Thummilla Village, Rajoli Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District; Section 151 CPC interim application; Articles 226, 14 and 300-A; Telangana High Court, Special Original Jurisdiction; Justice K. Lakshman; decided 23-07-2025; counsel P.V. Samuel Vinay Sagar; AGP for Revenue.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ petition permitted with liberty to avail alternative remedies available under law; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. ¶30

Harijana Rajanna, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' inaction in considering the petitioner's representations dated 29.04.2021 and 11(21).12.2024 was illegal and arbitrary, warranting a writ of mandamus directing them not to interfere with the petitioner's possession of 5.00 acres in Sy.No.241, Thummilla Village, Rajoli Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District (as prayed; not adjudicated owing to withdrawal).

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Permission to withdraw the writ petition, with liberty to avail alternative remedies available under law, was sought by learned counsel for the petitioner (with an endorsement to that effect on the bundle) and the court granted the liberty as sought for.

¶28

Key takeaways

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.ratio¶30
In the circumstances of the case, no order as to costs was made.ratio¶30
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P. No. 21259 of 2025 (High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, Special Original Jurisdiction; oral order dated 23-07-2025; Hon'ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman): Harijana Rajanna, agriculturist of Thummilla Village, Rajoli Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, sought a writ of mandamus against the State of Telangana revenue authorities (Principal Secretary Revenue; District Collector, Jogulamba Gadwal; RDO, Gadwal; Tahsildar, Rajoli) and private respondent K. Venkateswara Rao, declaring their inaction in considering his representations dated 29.04.2021 and 11(21).12.2024 illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A, and directing them not to interfere with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of 5.00 acres in Sy.No.241, Thummilla Village, Rajoli Mandal, Gadwal Revenue Division, Jogulamba Gadwal District; an interim application under Section 151 CPC sought protective directions. After brief argument, learned counsel Sri P.V. Samuel Vinay Sagar sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail alternative remedies available under law, having made an endorsement to that effect on the bundle. The court granted the liberty as sought for, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn, made no order as to costs, and closed miscellaneous applications, if any, as a sequel. No substantive issue was adjudicated.

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRSSENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 21259 OF 2025

¶7

Betwee n:

¶8

Harijana Rajanna, S/o Late Yesaiah, Aged about^{48 yrs., Occ; Agrl., Rl/o Thummilla} Village Rajoli l\zlandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep.by the Principal Secretary Revenue District Telangana Secretariat Hyderabad.

¶12

The Distnct Collector, Jogulamba Gadwal^{District. Jogulamba Gadwal Distrrct-}

¶13

The Revenue Drvisional Off^icer, Gadwal^{Revenue Division Jogulamba} Gadwal District.

¶14

The Tahsildar, Raioli Revenue [\ilandal Jogulamba^{GadwalDistrict-}

¶15

K.Venkateswara Rao.. S/o. Gopal^{Rao, aged about 80 yrs.,Rl/o Thummilla} Village, Waddepalli I,4andal, lvlahaboob Nagar^District.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Article 226 of lhe Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{fited therewith, the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue a Writ, Order or directton more^{particularlyone in the nature of} WRIT OF MANDAIVUS declaring inaction^{on the part of the Respondents in} considering the Representations dated^{29.04.2021 and 11(21).12.2024 submitted} by the Petitioner herein is illegal,^{arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violationof the} Principles of Natural Justice and^violation of^{Articles 14 and 300-4of the} Constitution of lndia and consequently^{direct the Respondents herein not interfere} with the peaceful possession and enloyment of^{the land of the Petitioner an extent}

¶18

of 5.00 acres in Sy No. 241 , situated at Thummilla Village, Rajoli tt4andal, Gadwal Revenue Division of Gadwl-Jogulamba District.

¶19

l.A.NO:1 OF 2025

¶20

Petition [Jnder Section 151 CPC praying that in the :)ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Corrt may be pleased to direct the Respondents herein not interfere with the peacc,ful possession and enjoyment of tlte land of the Petitioner an extent of 5.0(r acres; in Sy No. 241 , situated at Thummilla Village, Rajoli Mandal, Gadwal Revr. nue Divisicn of GadwlJogulamba Dislrict-

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI P.V.SAMUEL VINAY SAGAR

¶22

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

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : -

¶24

The Court made the following ORDER

¶25

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.21259 OF 2025

¶27

ORAL ORDER:

¶28

Afier arguing lor sontetirne Mr.P.V.Sarnuel Vinay^Sagar, learned counsel lor thc^petitioncr seeks^{pcrmissionof this Court} to withdraw the present Writ Pctition^{with a liberty to avail} alternativc rernedics aveilablc^{Lrnder law. He had made an} endorserneut to the saicl cfl'ect orr^{the bundle.}

¶29