R. Satyanarayana Reddy Vs Prl.Secretary (Revenue)… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

R. Satyanarayana Reddy Vs Prl.Secretary (Revenue)… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None - writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution/default without costs; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent (Tahsildar, Nelakondapally Mandal) dated 16-08-2017 vide R.C.No.8/55/2014 are illegal, arbitrary and ultra vires, and whether respondents should be directed not to enforce them or interfere with the petitioner's possession of land in Sy.No.709/AA, Painampalli Revenue village (raised in the prayer; not adjudicated as the petition was dismissed for non-prosecution).

Ratio / Principle

There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner when the matter was called on 11.08.2025 and again on the date of hearing; the court observed that the petitioner appeared not interested in prosecuting the case.

Key takeaways

The Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution/default, and there is no order as to costs.ratio¶88
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, in the matter shall stand closed.ratio¶89

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (K. Sarath, J.), Writ Petition No. 28362 of 2017, decided 01-09-2025: The petitioner had sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 declaring the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent (Tahsildar, Nelakondapally Mandal, Khammam) dated 16-08-2017 vide R.C.No.8/55/2014 illegal, arbitrary and ultra vires (citing Articles 14, 21 and '300,4' as printed), and non-enforcement thereof, alleging interference with the petitioner's possession of land in Sy.No.709/AA, Painampalli Revenue village, contrary to an order of injunction said to have been granted in I.A.No.299 of 2017 in C.M.A.No.11 of 2017 by the learned VI Addl. District Judge at Khammam. Pending since 2017, with no representation for the petitioner on 11.08.2025 and again on the hearing date, the writ petition was DISMISSED for non-prosecution/default, without costs, and pending miscellaneous applications were ordered closed. The substantive challenge to the Tahsildar's proceedings was not adjudicated on merits.

&

[³³⁰² J

'N. +

E

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

MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

WRIT PET]TION NO: 28362 OF 20'17

Between:

T:99if:]h a!a{g1.ara,.ygn1^geddy, Q{9^{NarsiReddy,ased 55 years,occ;} lgflculture'^{R/o H.No.4-3, PainampalliVillage, Nelakondapall-y} Mandal, Khainmam District.

.....PETITIONER

AND

{+

r'

'l The State of Telangana, Rep.. by principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Secreatariat, Hyderabad.

The District Collector, Khammam District.

The Tahsildar, Nelakondapally Mandal, Khammam, District.

S.H.O., Nelakondapally, Nelakondapally Mandal, Khammam District. 5. Dr.K.Vijaya Lakshmi, D/o koneru Narasimha Rao, Occ. R.M.p. R/o Nelakondapally Mandal, Khammam District.

......RESPONDENTS

Petition Under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affrdavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent dated 16-08-2017 vide R.c.No.8/55/2014 as illegal, arbitrary, ultra vires, unconstitutional, violative of article 14,21 and 300,4 of Constitution of lndia and also contrary to the order of injunction granted in l-A.No.299 of 2017 in c,M.A.No.11 of 2017 by the learned vil Addr. District Judge at Khammam and consequently direct the respondent not to enforce the orders passed by the 3rd respondent on 1648-2017 including with interfering with petitioner,s peaceful possession and enjoyrnent of petitioner's property admeasuring Ac 0.2g guntas situated in sy.No.709/AA, at Painampali Revenue village of nellakondapalli Mandal, Khammam District.

{:

t

. I

*s

t*

**, f

l.A.NO: 10F 2017

Between:

P. NO: 4283 0F 20171

The State of Telanoana, .nqp.. pV principal Secretary, )epartment of Revenue, Secreata-riat, i-rvaEiaoio^{"'-','s'|vvv'!L}

The Diskict Collector, Khammam District.

t*

t{ f &

The Tahsildar, Nelakondapally Mandal, Khammam, f,i ;trict.

....pETtTlo IERS/RESPoNoENTS

AND

1 Reddimalla Satva Agriculture. Ri5 ?.1'^?JT3T^{j,1,;",tJi,,*ffi} :5":'il,ipffo ji,ili,i,i;,?.j:

Khammam District

, I|:ff|i;lr{ouse officer, Netakondapaily, Nehkond;r raily Mandat,

**

Dr.K Vijaya Lakshmi,.D/o koneru Narasimha Rao, Occ. R.M.p. R/o Netakondapaly Mandat, Khilil;ffii;i;i:' -.

(Respondents 2 & 3 are not necessary parties to this p€ lition)

......RESPoTII IENTS/PETITIoNERs

+iE

Petition Under Section 151 CpC praying that in the ci :umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dr 24.0g.2017 passed in wp.r.rr.2g362 0f 2017 and dismiss the writ petition.

l.A.NO:2 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 3s248 0F 2017t

Petition under Section 1S1 CpC praying that in the ci.r u651rn"". stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou.1 may be pleased to suspend the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent dat,,d 16_0g- 2017 vide R.C.No.Bi55120.14, pending disposal of the above writ petitior

t.A.NO: 10F 2018

*lf

Between:

D/o koneru Narasimha Rao, occ. R.M.p. F ro Netakondapaily fl:[rY?:1f,#htl#i'

....PETITIC}I IER/RESPONDENT

t*

*

AND

t i".1t3:"";l"L:fli1ft"[B:e. bv Principar secretary, Deparrment or

u

The District Collector, Khammam District.

The Tahsildar, Nelakondapally Mandal, Khammam, District.

4' s.H.o. Nerakondapaily, Nerakondapafiy Mandar, Khammam District.

....RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

6

'ff i,f,flf *1rf,.H?,1,^?Ifl aTil",;,1#,,"ffi,,X.1.,^l;,Spf ,f. ji"ili",,fr ;fl"j,

......RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

Petition Under section 15'l cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to vacate the interim order dated 24.g.2017 passed in Wp No. 2836212012.

Counset for the petitioner: SRI N.PRAMOD

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.l to 3 : Gp FOR REVENUE

Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : Gp FOR HOME

Counsel for the Respondent No.S : SRI C.BHARGAVA SARMA

The Court made the following ORDER

*.

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE I:.SARATH

WRIT PETITION No.28362 of i2)L7

ORDER:

This petition is coming for hearing sri nce 2017. On 11.08.2025, when the matter was called, there was no representation on behalf of the petitionel and therefore the matter was directed to be listed to, lay under the caption "For Dismissal". Even today, whr:; r the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It seems that the petitioner is n lt interested to prosecute this case

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for Non-prosecution/default. There shall be ro order as to costs

Pending miscellaneous applications, .f any in this etrtron , shail stand closed.

I x t ** f

** s (

St /-M. OSMAN ALI BAIG AS SISTANT REGISTRAB

r-1 \

//TRUE COPY//

--'

i \ SECTION OFFICER i\ the,{i fte II of Telangana at

To 1. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the,{i fte II of Telangana Hyderabad [OUT]

2 Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State: rf Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI

J One CC to SRI N PRAMOD, Advocate [OPUC] 4 One CC to SRI C.BHARGAVA SARMA, Advocate [OF^JC] 5 Two CD Copies

SA BS

l l

f

t*

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 10912025

I

(

1} ir * I i It; iIir I*

ORDER

.,=fi_*,<br>? :1
1t . lil '1126
o()!- ,1]i
, ,t l.J
*
s"

WP.No.28362 ot 2011

*

*

DISMISSING THE W.P

t *

FOR NON^_ PROSECUTION / DEFAUI..'WITHOUT COSTS.

*t q
A
tA