E. Kumar Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

E. Kumar Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Directions issued to the respondent police authorities (Nos. 4 and 5) not to interfere with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property mentioned in the petition (Sy. No. 181/D, admeasuring 0.35 gts, Hydershahkote Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District) and to abstain from involvement in civil disputes between the petitioner and private parties; actions strictly in accordance with law unaffected; writ petition disposed of with no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 (police) in allegedly interfering, without legal authority, in the civil matter concerning the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property in Sy. No. 181/D, admeasuring 0.35 gts, Hydershahkote Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, is illegal and arbitrary.

Court's answer

The respondent police authorities are directed to refrain from interfering with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property mentioned in the petition.

Ratio / Principle

The respondent police authorities shall also abstain from involving themselves in any civil disputes between the petitioner and private parties.

Key takeaways

It is clarified that any action taken by the respondent police authorities strictly in accordance with law and following due process shall remain unaffected by this order.ratio¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (N. Tukaramji, J.) disposed of Writ Petition No. 33480 of 2018 filed by E. Kumar under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, alleging that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 (Station House Officer and Sub Inspector, P.S. Rajendranagar) were interfering in his civil matter relating to possession and enjoyment of land in Sy. No. 181/D, admeasuring 0.35 gts, Hydershahkote Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, contrary to Articles 21 and 300-A. The Government Pleader denied any unlawful interference. Considering the undefined limitations on police interference in purely civil disputes, the Court directed the respondent police authorities to refrain from interfering with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property and to abstain from involving themselves in any civil disputes between the petitioner and private parties, while clarifying that any action taken strictly in accordance with law and following due process would remain unaffected. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions were closed. No precedent was cited.

f

: II f I tI I ItI II t Ii I i iI I!tI E I I

13217 I

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FO_R_TTIEST.ATEOF TELANGANA}

THURSDAY, THE TTA'ENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER ]NA/O 1 THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT ]

:,,

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAiIIJI )/ '... .,

WRIT PETITION : 33480 OF 2018

Between:

E. Kumar, S/o. Late E Veeramallesh, Aged^{49 years, Occ: Agrictrlture,.R/o} H.No. 9-3-,431, Pensionpura, Langar House,^{Hyderabad.Rep-by his GPA B.} Ravi Yadav, S/o B. Kist'aiah, aged 47^{years,Occ: Business, R/o H. No. 9-1-} 3331F 121, Laxmlnagar; Langerhouse,^Hyderabad.

..PETITIONER

AND

1 The State of T€langana, Rep by its Secretary^{Home Department, T.S.} Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad. 3 The Deoutv Commissioner of Pblice, Shamshabad. 4 The Stdtion House'Officer, P.S. Rajendranagar,^Hyderabad. 5 Sub lnspeclor of Police, P. S. Rajendranagar. 6 K. Pratdp, S/o. K. NagiReddy, Aled about^{53 years, Occ: Engineer, Flat No} 4, Shilpa Apartment, Erramanjil Colony,^Hyderaba_d:

7 Om Prbkadh, S/o late SeethalSingh,^{Aged about 56 years,Occ:Business,} R/o H. No. 13€-822136127, Bapunagar, Hyderabad.

8 G. Vinod Reddy, S/o. G. Srinivasa Reddy,^{AgeQ about43 years,.Occ:} Business, R/o. H. No. 3-5-121lA, Flat No.^{1-6, Ramkote, Hyderabad.}

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{fited therewith,the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue the Writ or order/s more^particular oneⁱⁿ the^{nature of Writ} Mandamus, declaring the highhanded action^{of the respondentnos. 4 and 5 in} interfering in civit matters, as being illegal, arbitrary^{and violative of Articles 21 and} 300-A of Constitution of lMia and consequently^{directthe respondent nos. 4 and5} not to interfere with the^{peaoeful possession} and^{enjoyment of the petitioner over} the lands in Sy. No. 18l4t}, admeasuring 0.35^{gts of HydershahkoteVillage,} Rajendranagar Mandat, Ranga Reddy District.

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151^{CPC prayingthat in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High Court may be pleased to} forthwith issue, interim directions^{to the respondent4 and 5 not to interferewith the} peaceful possession and enjoyment of the , ,:^{petitioner,over the lands in Sy. No.} 18l4lD, admerrsurfng 0.35^{gts of Hydershahkote Village-, RajendranagarMandal,} Ranga Reddy District,^{pending disposat of the Writ Petition.}

lA NO: 2 oF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High Court may be pleased to} receive the Judgment dated^{O3tO1tzO'lBin O.S. No. 876 of 2009.}

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI^{P. SIVA REDDY} Representing SRIV. VENKATA^MAYUR

Counsel for ttre Respondent No.¹ to 5:^{MR D. PRADEEP,AGP FOR HOME}

Counsel for tlre Respondent^{No. 6} to 8:^---

The Court made the following: ORDER

I i. 'i i

\ t,t l ; i I I I I i I ! ! l

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI}

WRIT PETITION^{No.33480 OF 20{8}

ORDER:

;l

This Writ^{petition is filed under.Article2% of Gonstitution'of lndia "} seekirg the^{followingrclief/si}

. ' ... ?..""-. .*Y 4... -r^I -.

"...to issue the writ or order/s^{more partbularone in the nafure of wrfr of} Manda;n(s, declaring^{tre highhanded action of the respondent l'los. 4 and} 5 in interfering in^{civit mafrers,as being illegal,arbitrary and violativeof} Articles 21 and 300-A^{of the constihrtionof lndia and consequently direct} the respondent tlos.^{4 and 5 not to interfere with ttre peaceful possession} andenjoymentofsrepetitiorreroverthelandsinSy.No.lU4lD' admeasuring0.35gts.,ofHydershahkoteVillage,RajendranagarMandal, Ranga Reddy^{Dishir:t and be pbased to pass"'"}

Siva ReOdy, leamed^{counsel representingMr'V' Venkata} Mayur, learned counsel^{appearlngfor the petitioner andMr.D.Pradeep,} learned Assistant^{GovemmentPleaderfor Home appearingfor respondent} Nos.1 to 5

Leamed counsel^{for the petitioner submits that, as respondent Nos' 4} and 5 are allegedly^{interfering in the civil mattersof the petitioner without} any legal authority,^{the presentwrit petition has been filed seeking} app ropriate^{d irections.}

Learned Assistant^{Govemment Pleader for Home submitsthatthe} respondent^{police authoritieshave never interfered in the civil matters of} the^petitioner, as alleged.^{He further submitsthat the respondentpolice} rcting strictly within^{the parameters of law' Hence' the} allegations made^{by the petitioner are baselessand devoid of merit'} Accordingly, he^{prays for dismissalof the writ petition'}

\

\

1

I have perused the material available on record.

The grievance of the^petitioner is that the respondent^police authorities are interGring in his civil matteE,^{particularly in lelation to the} possession and enjoyment of the property mentioned in the^petition.

Having,Egard to the contentions of the^petitioner and the stand taken by the respondent^police authorities, and considering^{the urelldefined} limitations; on^police interference in^purely civil dhputes, the^respondent police aul:horities are directed to rcfrain ftom interfering with the^petitione/s possession and enjoyment of the property mentioned in the^petition. The respondent police authorities shall also abstain from involving themselves in any civil disputes between the^petitioner and^{privabpadies.}

However, it is clarified that any action taken by the Espondent^police authoritie,s strictly in accordance with law and folloadng due^processshall remain urrafbcted by this order.

Wil.h the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Mis;cellaneous Petitions, pendllg_lif any, shall stand closed.

SD'. M.OSMAN ALI BAIG ISTANT REGISTRAR

/,TRUE COPY"

TION OFFICER To, 1 . The Se,:reta ry, Home Department, T.S. Secretariat, of Telangana, HyderalJad.

2 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad. 3 The Deputy Commissioner of Pblice, Shamshabad. 4 The Station House Officer, P.S. Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. 5 Sub lnspector of Police, P. S. Rajendranagai. 6 One CC; to SRI V. VENKATA MAYUR, Advocate TOPUCI 7 Two CC;s to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of-Telangana. [OUT] w 8 Two CEt Qepisg

( I { ! I

: i i i ! ! ! i i i

HIGH COURT

DATED:i2011112025

ORDER

WP.No.33480 of 2018

S IA
t
a
<br>C) 2 3 Jt}l 2026 t
<br>t t

DISPOSIilIG OF THE WRIT PETITON WITHOUT COSTS

^1V
<br>.)^