Disposed

Eskilla Mallesham v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC13 Feb 2025WP/34397/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners claimed obstruction by forest authorities while cultivating land at Shivangalapalli village said to be notified reserve forest. The court directed the Forest Range Officer to consider the petitioners' representation with documents, personal hearing and lawful decision within set timelines.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.2 directed to consider representation dated 23.08.2021 with documents, personal hearing, decision within 3 weeks, communication within 2 weeks; no order as to costs.

Eskilla Mallesham Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

132521

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 34397 OF 2023

¶8

Between

¶9

1 Eskilla Malleqham, S/o. llaiah, Aged. 55 Years, Occ. Agriculture,^R/o.H.No.1- 19/8i2, Shivangalapalli Village, Konaraopet Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla^District.

¶10

') lskilla Chandraiah, S/o. lskilla llaiah, ASed. 46 Years, Occ.^Agriculture, R/o.H.No.1-111 , Shivangalapalli Village, Konaraopet Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District.

¶11

c Shivangala Raju, S/o. Narsaiah, Aged. 36 Years, Occ.^Agricultule, R/o H.No 2-14, Shivangalapalli' Village, Konaraopet Mandal, Rajanna Silcilla District

¶12

4 Bikanuru Sathaiah, S/o. BuchiNarayana, Aged. {{ Years, Occ.^Agriculfure, R/o H No.2-6811, Shivangalapalli Village, Koniraopet^Mandal, Rajanoa^Sircilla District.

¶13

5 Shivangala Vanaja, Wo. Sattaiah, Aged 32 Years,^{Occ.Agricullure,} $1o^{H No 1-77, ShlvangalapalliVillage, Konaraopet Mandal Rajanna SircillS} District.

¶14

b Eskilla Shobha, Wo^Deyqiqfr, Ag.ed 25 lears,^{Ocq,Agricullure,} R/o.Rudraram, Kodurpaka Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District

¶15

7 Sinqaraveni Sujath'a, Wo Janqrdhal. Aged 47^{Years, Occ. Agriculture,} R/o H No^{1-1q/C, VTCShivangalapalli Village, Konaraopet Mandal.Rajnna} Sircilla District.

¶16

8 lskilla Padma, Siq. Lachaiah, Aged. 43 Year9, Occ. Agricultqre,^{R/o H.No.3-} 88. Rudraram, Kodurpaka, Rajanna Sirpilla^Di$trict.

¶17

o E'skilla Sandhva. D/o. Mallesham, Aqed. 26 Years. OQc. Aqriculture, E/b H ry-q 1 .196/2,^{Shivangb-lapilliVillige, Konaraop'et Mandal -Raj4nna} 9ircilla Distript,

¶18

1 0 Ellammala Malleshqm, S/o. Rajaiah, fgeQ. 31^{Years,Occ. Agricullure,} ft/o.H^{No.'l-97. ShivangalapalliVillage, Konaraopet Mandal RajannaSircilla} Dlstrict.

¶19

11 Putta Ananth Reddy, S/o. Raji Reddy,^Aged 32^{Years. Occ.Agricullurq,} Rio H.No 2-'13, Shitbngalapalli Village, Konaraopet Mandal.^{RajanriaSircilla} Dlstript.

¶20

1 2 Shivarigala Ellaiah, S/o.^{Ivlallaiah, Aged. 46 Years,Occ.Agriculture,} R/o H.No 2-13, Shivangalapalli Village,^{(onaraopetMandal,} Rajanna^Sirpilla Districl.

¶21

1 3 Shivangala Ramulu, S/o. Ellaiah, Aged.^{52 Years,Occ. Agriculturg,} B/o.H No.'l-94,^{ShivangalapalliVillage, Konaraopqt Mandal, RalannaSircilla} District

¶22

...PET,r.NERS

¶23

AND

¶24

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Forest Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad,^T.S.

¶25

The Forest Range Officer, Rajanna Sircilla District, Karimnagar, Telangana State

¶26

The District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla District.

¶27

The Revenr.re Divigignal Officer, Rajanna Sircilla District.

¶28

The Tahsildar, Konaraopet, Rajanna Sircilla District.

¶29

...RESPONDENTS

¶30

Petition under Article 226 of the Con$titution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Qpurt may be pleased to iqsue a r-r appropriate Writ, Qrdqr 9r directign mqre^particularly orle iq the nature of Writ of Ulandqmug declaring thQ^{actipn pf} the rcspondents, particularly the respondqnt No.2 interfgr!pg in petltioners agricultural lqnd obstructlng petitioners frgm daing agricultqre in tfie agricultural land bearing in Sy.Nos, 72 and 75 admeasuring an^{gxterll pf} Ac.4-009!g^to each Betitioner tgtal land to an e1lent of Ac 20-00 gts situated al Sivangalapalli Villaqq, Kongragpgt Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla Distriat, whiqn iS illegal,^{arhilrqry,unjqr!,} uncgnstitutional, violation of^principleq of nqtglal^jystica and^qffenq yndet Articles 14 pnd 100-4^qf the Constitutiqn of lndia and oongequqntly difect tlg regpondqqt No.2 ngt to rnterfere rn the^petitioners agricultural land from doing agrioulturqⁱ¹ the agricultural land bearing in Sy Nos 72 and 75 edmeaqgring an e.xtenl^pf Ac^{4-00 gts} to^{eachpetitionertotal} land^tg an^extent 9t^Ac.?0-00 gts^situated et Sivqngalapalll Village, Konaraopet Mandal, Raianna Sirgilla QistricJ lA NO: 'f OF 2023

¶31

Fetition under Sectipn 151 9Pe prayi4g that in lhe circumstances stgtqd in tfre affidavrt filed in support of the^petition, the Hig[^pourt may be^pleased to direct the respondent No.? not to ioterfere ie the^petitiongrs agricultural land from doing agricuiture bearing in Sy.Not. 72 and 75 a{meqsuring to each^petitioners extent, about total land to an^extent of Ac.20-00^gts situated^a1 $ivaqgalapalti Village, Konaraopet Mandal. Rajanna Sircilla^{pistrict.pending} drsposal of the writ petition

¶32

Counsel for the Petitioner: Smt. R. MADHAVI LATHA Ccunsel^for the^{RespondentNos.} 1&2: GP FOR FORESTS Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3to5: AGP FOR REVENUE

¶33

The CQurt made the following: ORDER

¶34

¶35

HON'BLE^{MRS JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA}

¶36

WRIT PETITION^{No.34397 of 2O23}

¶37

ORD ER:

¶38

Heard Smt. R.^{Madhavi Latha,tearnedcounsel} appearing on^{behalf of the petitioners,learned Assistant} Government^{Pleader for Forests, appearingon behalf of} respondent Nos.1^{and 2 and tearnedAsst' Government} Pleader for^{Revenueappearingon behalf of respondent} Nos.3 to 5.

¶39

2 The^{petitionersapproached the Court seeking prayer} as under:

¶40

"...to issue an^{appropriateWrit Order or directionmore} particularly one in the^{nature of Writ of Mandamus} declaring the^{action of the respondentsparticularlythe} respondent^{No.2 interferingwith petitioners'agricultural} land obstructing^{petitionersfrom doingagriculture in the} agricultural^{land bearing in Sy' Nos 72 and 75 admeasuring} an extent of^{Ac.4.00gts to each petitioner total land to an} extent of^{Ac.20-00 gts situated at Sivangalapalli Vrllage} Konaraopet^{t'landal Rajanna Sircilla District which is illegal} arbitrary^{unjust unconstitutionalviolation of principlesof} natural^{justice and offend under Articles 14 and 300-4of} the Constitution of India and^consequentlY direct the not to interfere^{with the} petitioners' respondent^No.2 agricultural^{land from doing agriculturein the agricultural}

SN, J wP _34397 ]023

land bearing in Sy. Nos.72 and 75 admeasuring an extent of Ac.4.00 gts to each petitioner total land to an extent of Ac.20-00 gts situated at Sivangalapalli Village Konaraopet Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District and to pass...,,.

¶45

P RU ED TH ER ECORD 3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the petitioners had been doing agriculture in land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.20.00 guntas in Sy.Nos. 72 and 75 situated at Sivangalapalli Village, Konaraopet Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District. The petitioners have submitted representation to the respondent Nos.4 and 2 on 21.08,202t and Z3.OB.2O2I- respectively to restrain the respondent Nos.4 and 2 not to interfere with the agricultural operations of the petitioners and not dispossess the petitioners from the said subject land. But no steps have been taken on the said representations by the respondents till date. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners approached the Court by flling the present writ petition.

¶46

The learned Assistant Government pleader for Forests, who places reliance on the counter aFfidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in particular para Nos. 3 and 4, su.bmits that respondent No.2 is not trying to dispossess the petitioners

-tt:'.

-'-],

SN. J wP i4397-2023

from^{the petitionerssubject land as alleged by the petitioners} herein.^{Para Nos'3 and 4 of the counter affidavit filedon behalf} of respondent^{Nos'1 and 2 are extracted hereunder:}

¶53

'3. I respectfully^{submit that the land claimedby the} petitioners^{in SY.Nos.72and 75 of SivangalapalliVillage of} Konraopeta^{Mandal, RajannaSircillaDistrict is a notified} Reserve^{forestarea,notified underSection 4 of the} Telangana^{ForestAct,1967 dated :.2'12jrg7]vide Gazette} Extension^{(ShlvangalapalliReserve} No.2363,^{as Sircilla} Forest),^{consistingofAc.250.00guntas and no pattas were} I resoectfullv I ranted^{at the time of the notification'} s b itt at th^e lleqa ro e D one att e n r f r ts h as such^{it is denied'}

¶54

I respectfully^{submitthat the contentionof the} petitioners^{it that they have pattas in Sy'Nos'72 and 75 of} Shivangalapalli^{Village and are showing their landin notified} Reserve^{Forest Block area ofSircillaExtension} (Shivangala^{palli)Reserve Forestarea is clearly demarcated} as^{per tne Notification' since the dateof notification"'}

¶55

5 Learned^{Assistant GovernmentPleader for Forestssubmits} that the^{writ Petitioncould bedisPosed of directingthe} 2nd respondent^{to consider the representation of the petitioners} dated^{23.08.2021withina reasonableperioddulycalling upon}

SN, J wP 34397 2023

the petitioner to submit all^{the documents in support of the} petitioners'case evidencing the^{possessionof the subjectland} for total Acs.152.00^{guntas in Sy.Nos.72/UL, 75/3, t2/l/3 of} Sivalingalapalli Village,^{KonaraopetaMandaland also the request} of the^petitioners to^{permit the petitioners to cultivate the} subject lands since it is the^{specific case of the petitionersthat} the petitioners have^{pattadarpass books issued in favour of the} petitioners by the revenue authorities concerned.

¶60

Learned counsel appearing on behalf^{of the petitioners} does not dispute the said^{submissionmade by the learned} Assistant Government Pleader^{for Forests.}

¶61

7. Takin into consid ratio n

¶62

(a) The facts and circumstances of the case,

¶63

(b) The contents of the representation of the petitioners dated 23.O8.2O2L,

¶64

(c ) The averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1^{and 2 in particular} para Nos.3 and 4 (referred to and extracted above),

¶65

The writ petition is disposed of directing the^2nd respondent herein to consider the request of^the petitioners as put forth by the petitioners representation

7 (-

SN, J wP 34391 2023

dated 23,O8.2021 addressed to the^2"d respondent^herein seeking providing an opportunity^{to cultivate the subject} land situated in Sivalingalapalli^{Village, Konaraopeta} Mandal in Sy.Nos.72/l/L, 75/3, L2/tl3^{by duly calling} for all the required documents evidencing^{the fact of} possession of the subject lands by the^{petitioners and} pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioners dated 23.08.2021 in accordance to law,ⁱⁿ conformity with^principles of natural^{justice by givingan} opportunity of^personal hearing^{to the petitionerwithin} three (3) weeks from the date of^{receipt of a copy of the} order and duly communicate^{thedecision tothe} petitioners within two (2) weeks thereafter.^However, there shall be no order as to^costs.

¶70

As a sequel, the miscellaneous^{petitions, if any, pendingin}

¶71

the Writ Petition shall also^standclosed.

¶72

sD/^{.T, TIRUMALA} DE TREGISTRAR ASS

¶73

¶74

\ //TRUE^COPY// E TION^OFFICER

¶75

To,

¶76

The Principal^{Secretary to Government' Forest Department' Secretariat'} 2 +;36[il:^{;;:se orricer'Rajanna Sircilla District'Karimnagal' Telansana} cilla Qistrict

¶77

at anna^{SirQilla District} 4 na )l lla Q^istriat. 5 THA, voLate [O^PUGI o FORESTS ,High^{Csurt lpr thgStateof Telanganaat} 7 High Court^{fpr the State of Telangana' at} B lourl

.--.-{/

HIGH COURT

DATED:1310212025

ORDER

WP.No.34397 ot 2023

rt{ E STAi€
t
2
2 4 r{Ai 2U6
i,
t
r.',C

¶88

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CCISTS {+ \ tffil";

Eskilla Mallesham v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eskilla Mallesham v. The State of Telangana

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

Rathlavath Srinu Vs The State of Telangana

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Vs The Assistant Divisional Engineer

Sri. Rajesh Jain Vs The State of Telangana

Singareni Coal Mines Labour Union Vs The State of Telangana

Mangali Sailu Vs Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

Md. Saleem Vs Telangana State Road Transport Corporation