Nagelly Samuel Vs The State of Telangana

1. Nagelly Jeggaiah, S/o. Late Narsaiah Aged about 55 Years, Occ. Agriculture (Labour ) Rlio. Nallabelly Village and Mandal, Warangal ,,.,r,ll.rrr,r,Oaa

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat buildings, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Warangal, Warangal District.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsampet Revenue Division, Warangal District.

¶14

The Tahsildar, Nallabelly Mandal, Nallabelly Warangal District.

¶15

The Station House Officer, Nallabelly P.S. Nallebally, Warangal District.

¶16

The Nallabelly Gram Panchayat, Nallabelly Village and Mandal, Warangal District, Rep by its Panchayat Secretary.

¶17

Dama Sambaiah, S/o. Late Venkataiah, Aged about 60 Years Occ. Political Leader, F:/o. Nallabelly Village and Mandal, Warangal District.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

\

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent Nos. sth and 4th respondent in interfering / dispossessing the petitioners from their land in Sy No. 17t2, to an extent of Ac. 0.02 guntas situated at Nallabelly Village and Mandal of Warangal District is illegal, arbitrary, violation of the principles of natural^justice, fundamed,al rights guaranteed under the Constitution of lndia and as well as without^jurisdiction consequently direct the respondents not to interfere / dispossess the petitioners from the above said land.

¶21

1A NO: 1 oF 2024

¶22

Petition under section i 51 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 5th and 4th respondents nor to interfere / dispossess the petitioners from the land in Sy No. 1712. to an extent of Ac. 0.02 guntas situat€,d at Nallabelly Village and Mandal of warangar District forthwith pending disposar of the above writ petition.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI RAMAKOTAIAH KANDAL.A Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 5: SRI M.SRINIVAS, l\Gp FOR HOME Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.2 TO 4: SRI SAHAS REDDY, AGp FOi REVENUE

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI p.KISHORE RAO, SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYATH Counsel for the Respondent No.7: --

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

_ _- li-

! t

{l

HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.25493 oF 2024

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.4 and 5 in interfering with their possession in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.0-02 guntas in Survey No.1lt2 situated at Nallabelly Village and Mandal, Warangal District, as being arbitrary and unconstitutional.

¶33

Heard Mr. Ramakotaiah Kandala, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. M. Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home; and Mr. Sahas Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, and perused the material available on record

¶34

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home furnished written instructions and submitted that respondent No.S received a complaint from one Gone Kumara Swamy, wherein the complainant stated that he is the Secretary of MCPI (U) party; that on 26.08.2024, the petitioners along with their family members have entered into his land and kept the party Board aside and claimed that they are the actual owners of the land. On such petition, preliminary enquiry was conducted by respondent No.5. Respondent No.S gave a requisition to the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.6 Gram Panchayat asking

i

2

,..

him to furnish information about ownership and possession of the subject land, and accordingly, the Panchayat Secretary gave a written reply dated 27 08.2024 stating that the house bearin,S No.11-3lA2 to an extent of 221 .12 yards was dismantled and it bel,)ngs to MCPI (U) party, which was running their office in it, and it was n their possession for 30 years. As per the report of respondent No.6, respondent No.s has closed the complaint of Gone Kumara Swamy as 'civil in nature'.

¶39

According to the learned Assistant Government Pleader, there was no interference by respondent No.5 over the sullject land. Enquiry was conducted by respondent No.5 on the complairt lodged by Gone Kumara Swamy A copy of the written instructions along with closure report is served on the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶40