Kavangal Triveni Akkireddy Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Kavangal Triveni Akkireddy Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with directions: respondents not to interfere with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment of the house property except by due process of law, and due process of law to be initiated within two weeks from receipt of a copy of the Order; no costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent-authorities (respondents 2 and 3) can interfere with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the house property bearing Door No. 4-1-679, Jam Bagh, Hyderabad, and threaten dispossession without notice and without following due process of law. +1 more

Court's answer

The respondent-authorities are directed not to interfere with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment of the subject property except by due process of law.

Ratio / Principle

Due process of law is to be initiated by the respondent-authorities within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the Order, so as to avert any possible danger in the event of collapse of the dilapidated building.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.), disposing of Writ Petition No. 22320 of 2018 (decided 18.02.2025): Mother and son claiming to be tenants since 1952 of house property bearing Door No. 4-1-679, Jam Bagh, Jawahar Lal Nehru Road, Wanaparth Colony, Hyderabad, paying rent to Purender Memorial Charitable Trust, alleged that Endowments authorities visited the property on 20.06.2018 and 22.06.2018 and threatened dispossession without notice, invoking Articles 226 and 21 of the Constitution. Respondents contended the property belongs to a charitable institution governed by the Telangana State Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 30 of 1987, under which all leases stand cancelled, leasing is permissible only every three years by public auction, and the old, dilapidated building posed a risk of collapse to inmates. The Court, keeping in view the legal position under Act 30 of 1987 and the dilapidated condition of the building, directed the respondent-authorities not to interfere with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment except by due process of law, and further directed that due process of law be initiated within two weeks from receipt of a copy of the Order to avert any possible danger from collapse of the building. Writ petition disposed of with the above directions; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

[³³⁰⁰¹

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

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

WRIT PETITION NO: 22320 OF 2018

Between:

Kavangal Triveni Akkireddy, W/o. Late. Gopal Krishna Kavangal,^{Aged about} 65 yeais, Occ. School Teacher Rl/o. 4-1-679, Jam^{Bagh,Jawahar Lal Nehru} Road, Wanaparth Colony, Hyderabad

Aditya Kavangal, S/o. Late. Gopal Krishna Kavangal, Occ.^{Private Employee,} Age-d about 33 years, Rl/o. 4-1-679, Jam Bagh, Jawahar Lal^{Nehru Road,} Wanaparth Colony, Hyderabad

...PETITIONERS

AND

1 The State of Telangana, Endowments Department, Rep. by its^Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2 The Commissioner of Endowments Department, Endowments^Department, Boggula Kunta, Tilak Road, Hyderabad.

The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments^{Department, Endowments} Department, Boggula Kunta, Tilak Road, Hyderabad-

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Courtmaybe} pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the^{2nd and 3rd respondentin interferingwith} petitioners life and liberty and also their peaceful possession and enjoyment of (House Property bearing Door no. 4-1-679, Jam Bagh, situated in Rl/o.^4-1-679, JamBagh, Jawahar Lal Nehru Road,^{WanaparthColony, Hyderabad withoutany} authority of law as highly illegal, arbitrary and^{violative of Ar1.21of the Constitution} of lndia and consequently direct the 2nd and^{3rd respondent not to interfere with} petitioners life and liberty and also their peaceful possession and enjoyment of

1Ery

"t/

House Property bearing Door no. 4-1-679, Jam Bagh, situated in R/o. 4_1_679, JamBagh, Jawahar Lal Nehru Road, Wanaparth Colony, Hyderabad.

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

Petition under section 15i 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 2nd and 3rd respondent not to interfere with petitioner s life and liberty and also their peacef ul possession and enjoyment of land Ho -rse property bearing Door no. 4-1-679, Jam Bagh, situated in R/o. 4-1-679, Jarn Bagh, Jawahar Lal Nehru Road, wanaparth colony, Hyderabad pending the disposal of this writ petition.

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI E. VENKATA SIDDHARTHA

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

The Court made the following: ORDER

{!ffiry? r//

wp 2320 _2018 NBK, J

I I

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA}

WRIT PETITION N0.22320^{of 2018}

ORDER:

The case of the petitioners^{is that they are tenantsof the propefty} situated irr 4-1-679,^{Jambagh,.Jawahar Lal Nehru-Road,W..anaparthy} Colony, IJyderabad,^{and they havb been in possessionof the subject} properly since 1952. It^{is statedthat theyhavebeen paying rent for the} subject property to^{Purender Memorial CharitableTrust; and that on} 20.06.2018 and^{22.06.2018,the respondentauthoritiesvisited the subject} land and threatened^{the petitionerswith dispossession, statingthat the} subject land belongs^{to the Endowments Department.The grievanceof the} petitioner is that the respondent^{authorities are trying to interferewith the} possession ofthe^{petitioners and trying to dispossess themfromthe subject} land without issuing^{any noticeand withoutfollowing due processof law.} Hence, the^presentwrit Petition.

Heard Mr. E.^{VenkataSiddhartha, learnedcounsel} for the petitioners; and the learted^{Government Pleaderfor Endowments} Perused the record.

Leamed Government^{Pleaderfor Endowments, based on the} counter-affidavit,^{contendsthat the subj ect property belongsto a charitable} institution, and^{therefore govemedby the EndowmentsDepartment} according to the^{provisionsof the Telangana State Charitable and Hindu} Religious Institutions^{and Endowments Act, 30 of 1987(for short' the} Act). According^{to the provisions of the Act, al1 the leases stand cancelled'} and the^properties have^{to be leasedout every 3 years in a public auction} by following^{due procedure; and hence the contentionof petitioner No.1}

2

wp 22320_2018 NBK, J

that she has beerr stal,ing for more than 66 years, is against the law. It is also contended that no lease can be granted for more than 3 years and no authority is ernpou,ered to lease out the properly withour public auction. It is further statecl in paragraph No.4 of the counter as follo,,rrs:

"04. ln reply to the averments made at para 4 of the affidavit it is submitted that since the building has become very old and it is in dilapidated condition, this respondent has to take steps to renovate the building and therefore the measurements have been taken by the authorities. Petitioner is not supposed to reside in the old building'as it may collapse at any time. There is risk of life to the inmates."

Considering the lespcctive submissions and perusing the record, more parlicularly the contentions in the counter affidavi-, it may be noted that it is the specific contention of the respondent-authorities that after commencement of Act 3 0 of I 987, all the leases^.whatsoever stand cancelled, and the properties are to be leased out once e\ery three years in a public auction. It is also contended by the respondent authorities that the very contentior.r of the petitioners that they are residing in the subject premises fbr over 60 years is itself contrary to the provis,ions of Act 30 of 1987. Furthermore, it is also specifically contended that the building needs renovation as it has become old and in dilapidated condition and it is risky for the inmates to live there due to chances of collapse an.y time.

ln that rriew of the matter, keeping in view the legal position as per the Act 30 of 1987, and also keeping in view that the sub.ject property is in dilapidated condition with possibility of collapse, risk.ing the lives of inmates, this Court while directing the respondent-arthorities not to property interfere with petitioner possession and enjoyment of th. lfject

3

wp 2232010t8 NBK, J

except^{by due process of law, also deemsit appropriate to furtherdirect} that due^{proiessof law be initiated within two weeks from the date of} receipt of^{a copy of this Order, so as to avert any possible danger in the} event of^{collaPseofthe building'}

AccordinglY, the writ^{petition is disposed' of with the above} directions. No^costs Miscellaneous^{petitions pending,if any' shall stand} closed.

,1',#"JPe'L',i$k 7

D

/TTRUE^COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

To, cretariat,^{The Stateof} 1. Endow^{mentsDePartment,ThePrinciPalSecretary'} Telang^{ana, Hyde rabad}

The Boggula^{Commissioner ofKunta, TilakRoad,} Endowm^HYd ents^{erabadDepartment, Endowments Department'}

3 The Department^{Asslsta nt , Boggula CommissloneKunta' r Tilak of Endowments' DePartment, Road,HyderabadEndowments}

4.5. One Two^{CC CCs to to Sri GP E' for EndowmVenkataSiddhartha, ents,High Advocate IOPUCICourtfor the Stateof Telangana,at} Hvderabad [OUTI

Cl Two CD^CoPies

TJ GJP W

HIGH GOURT

DATED:1810212025

ORDER

WP.No.22320 of 2018

' .;',,'.', . -\
'. a,"<br>L,i. \
,' ..<br>tl4 ttl rut il
, .!,' ..
* ?"",.",,.
:t-

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

WITHOUT COSTS

c,t
fl