N.Goverdhan Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

N.Goverdhan Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

132171

tN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD (Special Originat Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

WRIT PETITIO NNO:6418 OF 2017

Between:

l N Goverdhan Reddv. S/o Late Manik Reddy, Aged about 49 years, Rr/o g-143,. Maitaredevpaly, Rajenorin"gri rvi"nJr['R.i]dltiiZt

M/s.Pride lndia Mansions pvt., Ltd., registered office at 1g_.14_6, G.M.Nagar, Kanchanbaqh, sanrosh Nagar f R";u Ht;;6;I ,"p oy rrs Managing Director, Mr.Abdut Hateem Biig, slo AoJur F5i, a"-i;lig"o abour 46 years.

M/s.Park Square prooertigs pvt., Ltd., Registered office at Road No.12, R_M K.ptaza, . ilnd Ftdor, Banlara Hiiis, nv'0"i5b""i,^"r"p by its Manaoino Director, Mr.Mustafa Kamaat Siddique, slo Gl" c-nr'i;, Soiiq..ii ,g';?'5#lY 40 years.

...PETITIONERS

AND

Secretariat, The State of Telanoana. Saifab;d, HyoeiaUio,-felan-gbnrl-- Reo by its principal Secretary,^"*'''''"' Home Department,

The Commissioner of police, Hyderabad city, Basheerabagh, Hyderabad

The Assistant Commissioner of police, Falaknuma Division, Hyderabad.

The Deputy Commissioner of police, South Zone, Hyderabad.

The SHO & lnspector of police, Chandrayanagutta police station, Chandrayanagutta, Hyderabad, Telangaia.

6 [] lglplmal_Rao, s/o tate Appa Rao, Aged about 63 years, Rt/o. 226, Sydenhams Road, Chootai, Chinnai, farn'iinlAu--'^--'

I

Mohammed Jamaluddin, S/o_. Ahmed eamaruddin, aqed about 44 yearc, R/o. H.No. 2O-t-313, Fathe Darwaza, tiyOeiaOit loS]latengail^{,-- -'}

RR 6and7 are impleaded as per C.O. dt.2g-2_17 in WpMp g389 of 17

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Anide 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an order or direclion, more particurarry, one in the nature of writ of

Mandamus' l declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 il d their henchmen in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners land in Sy.Nos.103/12 to 19 and 103/2011 to an extent of A, u'-"' guntas belongs to Bandlaguda, Hyderabad, under the guise of ,n" oro"l which does not exist, as ilesat, improper, unjust and ",:lrli ,ilIiIJ,:"; that there is no order under section 145 Crpc issued by tr r sps6;21 Executive magistrate with regard to the property in Sy. Nos. 1 03/ 17 tc 19 to an extent of Ac.29-00 guntas situate i inrerrerence or any kind " ;:_:,"Ti:',1T llli",:;lllil,:^{,.,ill,l"ll1,ll} his subordinate police personnel not to interfere in deve tar activities beins te an extent cr carried our by petitioners Ac 2e_00 r,,i:: , ",,ol l,lJ,:':,T:::[ffi::. ;:""::::::ll"*"ropm,: ,., ,Jiirl..r,,r ," ,J

I.A. N o: 10F 2 017(WP MP NO: 785 10F 20171

petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the circL r tstances stated in the affidavit fited in support of the writ petitionl tne U,gn Court r ray be pleased to direct the respondents, no d everopm enta r a crivit es r ";:^{:".:j:T':r."^:: :ffi i:i: .j, j} : ;"ffi:::: 00 guntas situate at Bandla "^{io to tn} " p etion ers ir n ecessa ry, r#t; J J:.": H":1';::T;,;:il:, r",,

Counsel for the petitioners: MS BHANU pRIyA G

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: Gp FOR HOME

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 and 7:__

The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

WRIT PETITION No.6418 OF 2017

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia

t

seeking the following relief

"...to lssue an order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of^'Writ of Mandamus',

l. declanng the action of the respondents 1 to 4 and their henchmen in interfering with the possesslon and enjoyment of the petitioners land in Sy.Nos. 103/12 to 19 and 103/20/1 to an extent of Ac.62-22 guntas belongs to Bandlaguda, Hyderabad, under the guise of the order under Section 145 Cr.P.C., which does not exist, as illegal, mproper, unjust and contrary to law and

ll. declare that there is no order under Section 145 Cr.P.C. issued by the Special Executive Magistrate with regard to the

property in Sy.Nos. 103/17 to 19 to an extent of Ac.29-00 guntas, situated at Bandlaguda Village, Hyderabad and hence, no intefierence of any kind is permissible; and

lll fudher direct the 4th respondent or. his subordinate police personnel not to interfere in developmental activities being carried out by petitioners 2 and 3 in respect of the propefty in Sy. Nos. 1 03/1 7 to 19 to an extent of Ac.29-00 guntas situated at Bandlaguda Village, Hyderabad;

lV. and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Couft may deem-fit and proper."

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the cause

in this writ petition does not survive for adjudication and the petition has

become infructuous.

2

:1

,t.

Recording the said submission, the Writ petiti: r is dismissed as

infructuous. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall l; and closed.

S D/.L. VIJAYA LAXMI AS!; STANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 One CC to lrzls Bhanu Priya G, Advocate [OpUC] 2 J.*g^{C9.to_ G P_forHome, High Court for the Stateof Te} angana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

3 Two CD Copies TJ TJ

Prra .

&

HIGH COURT

DATED:2010812025

ORDER

itttE SiA l5
t'
v
()o I I lr ;il
I
),,
I
.\ -
i--, :Sr'n-.:,' ./

WP.No.6418 of 2017

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS

I

f't<sup>(4 a\r1x