Disposed

Patti Ravi Kumar, Adilabad District and Another v. Prl. Secretary, Home Dept., Hyd and 4 Others

Telangana HC12 Sept 2025WP/29705/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The writ petition was disposed of by confirming an interim order directing police authorities not to interfere with the petitioners' peaceful possession of their property, holding that police cannot interfere in civil possession disputes.

What did the court decide?

Interim order restraining respondents from interfering with peaceful possession of land made absolute.

Patti Ravi Kumar, Adilabad District and Another Vs Prl… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

13217 |

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER , TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

PETITION NO:29705 OF 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

Patti Ravi Kumar, S/o. Patti aLi Aged 62^years, Occ: Retd. Employee R/o. H.No.27-2-811, i Bel lampalli, Adilabad District.

¶9

Pafti Dheeraj Kumar, S/o. Ravi Kumar, Aged 24 yearc, Occ: Student, Ryo. H.No.27 -2-811, Peddanapalli Bellampalli, Adilabad District.

¶10

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

¶13

The Statelof Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶14

Superintendent of Police, Adilabad District.

¶15

Deputy Superintendent of Police Bellampalli, Adilabad Dist.

¶16

4.. Circle lnspector of Police Bellampalli, Adilabad District.

¶17

Dasari Jaya,. Wlo. Late Dasari Raju, Aged about 46 years, Occ: Flower Business Rl/o. lB Tandur, Bellampalli, Adilabad.

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents No.2 to 4 and their subordinates in interfering with the civil rights of the petitioners in respect of their property i.e. land admeasuring Ac.4-06 guntas in Sy.No.167/A/1 of Budakalan Village, Bellampalli Mandal, Bellampalli, Adilabad District as illegal, null and void and also violation of Articles 19, 21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia and for a

¶19

consequential order directing the respondents No.2 to 4 not to interfere with the civil rights of the petitioners in respect of their property i.e. land admeasuring Ac.406 guntas in Sy.No.1 67tN1of Budakalan Village, Bellampalli Mandal, Bellampalli, Adilabad District.

¶20

' Petition under Section 151 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 respondents No.3 & 4 and their subordinates not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over their property i.e., land admeasuring Ac.4-06 guntas in Sy.No.167lN1 of Budakalan Village, Bellampalli Mandal, Bellampalli, Adilabad District pending disposal of the above writ petition. :|

¶21

Counselfor the Petitioner: SRt CH. DHANAMJAYAFOR; SRI B. GOPAL RAO

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents No.l to 4: AGp FOR HOME

¶23

counsel for the Respondent No.5: sRr VEDULASRTNTVAS

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

/^'

¶27

THE^{HON'BLESRI JUSTICEN'}

¶28

gRDER:

¶29

This^{Writ Petition is filed with the followingprayer:}

¶30

of^the "To^{issue a Writ' Orderor direction more particularly one in} tne 1tlon of^{Mandamu"'-0""t"'ins} the^nature "r'rn to^{4 and tn'' t'o"tdinatesin intertering} respondenti;;; with^{the civ} rignts or the:,l"Jtlo:"'::l::T property^{i-e., land admeasut'';"r":} Bellampalli^Mandal' No.167/A/1^{of Buddakalan} ,.u'.1,',]]",,^{rrult and void and also} eerramparri,io,,"o"o''"]:"1;}".t-i;|illii.i""orrndia violation^{of Articles19'21} order^".T ;il^directins the^{respondents No'} and^{for ;;;;'"ntial} to^{4 not to interrere:::;::'l'.:t*::i[fi'Hffil} Mandal' vurase'^Berram respect^{of their property} l? -,1' "-Jo", ""u"mpalli "^{tu'^t} "; ::i:::' " Bellampalli'^{Adilabad District'"}

¶31

2.HeardSriB.GopalRao,learnedCounselforthepetitioners

¶32

andlearnedAssistantGovernmentPleaderforHomeappearing

¶33

onbehalfofrespondentNos.lto4.

¶34

3.LearnedAssistantGovernmentPleaderforHomesubmits

¶35

thattherespondentpoliceauthoritieshaveneverinterferedwith thecivilrightsofthepetitionersinrespectoftheproperty mentioned^{in the petition. He contends that the allegations raised} --^"-

¶36

¶37

¶38

in the petition are not substantiated by any supporting material, and therefore, prays that the petition be dismissed.

¶39

He further submits that this Court, by an interim order dated 02.09.2016, directed respondent Nos. 3 and 4, along with their subordinates, not to interfere with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property. He contends that the absence of the petitioners during subsequent proceedings indicates that their grievance has already been effectively redressed by virtue of the said interim order. Accordingly, he prays that appropriate orders be passed.

¶40

The unofficial respondent No. 5 submits that he is in no manner connected with or involved in the allegations raised in the petition. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶41

I have perused the material availabie on record.

¶42

Havingj considered the submissions advanced and taking note of the fact that this Court has already passed an interim direction restraining respondent Nos. 3 and 4, as well as their subordinates, from interfering with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment of the subject property, it is evident that such direction is consistent with the limitations imposed on the police in relation

¶43

tocivilmatters.Evenincaseswherecrimeproceedingsare pending,thepoliceauthoritiesarenotpermittedtointerferewith civil^{possession disputes. Therefore, this Court findsit appropriate} to confirm^{the said interim direction'}

¶44

B.Accordingly,theinterimorderdated02'09'2016ismade absolute.^{RespondentNos' 3and 4'along with their} subordinates,aredirectednottointerferewiththepeaceful possessionandenjoymentofthepetitioners'property,namely landadmeasuringAc.4.06guntasinSurveyNo.l'TlNlof BudakalanVillage,BellampalliMandal'Bellampalli'Adilabad District,^{save and except in strict accordance with law'}

¶45

g.Withtheabovedirection,thisWritPetitionisdisposedof. There shall^{be no order as to costs'}

¶46

Miscellaneous^{petitions'if any'pending in the Petition'shall}

¶47

stand closed

¶48

¶49

Sd/-K.BHAVANI ASSISTANT

¶50

//TRUE^COPY// OFFICER

¶51

To 1 The PrinciPal Secretary^{Home Department' Stateof} Hyderabad.

¶52

Secretariat,

¶53

The^{Superintendent of Police' AditabadDistrict'}

¶54

The^{DeputySuperintendent of PoliceBellampalli' Adilabad Dist'}

¶55

4.TheCirclelnspectorofPoliceBellampalli,AdilabadDistrict

¶56

One^{CC to SRI B. GOPAL RAO' Advocate IOPUC]}

¶57

6TwoCCstoGPforHome,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat HYderabad.tOUTl

¶58

One^{CC to SRI VEDULA SRiNIVAS' Advocate [OPUC]}

¶59

B. Two^{CD CoPies} a *

+/H-_-

'FfA'-'

HIGH COURT

DATED i1210912025

r,.ri ::
\ f'.
i_,
* nflN
2 o L:i,
*
ORDER
WP.No.297A5 ot 2016

¶69

DISPOSING OF^{THE WRIT PETITION}

¶70

WITHOUT COSTS

¶71

q
F
\1

Patti Ravi Kumar, Adilabad District and Another v. Prl. Secretary, Home Dept., Hyd and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Patti Ravi Kumar, Adilabad District and Another v. Prl. Secretary, Home Dept., Hyd and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Metukupally Venkat Ram Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Chiluveru Uppalaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Shahzoor Ali Siddiqui Vs The State of Telangana

Imtiyaz Husen Vs The State of Telangana

Ramdas Ratnam, Adilabad Dist Vs Prl Secy, Home Dept., Hyd and 3 Ot

Arigela Tirupati Swamy, Vs The State of Telangana