Disposed

Syed Sadaq S/o.Syed Ahmed v. State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue

Telangana HC11 Jun 2025WP/9325/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged respondents' attempt to interfere with his possession of agricultural land in Sy.No.297, Sarangpoor Village, without due legal procedure. Respondents undertook to follow due process. Court directed respondents not to interfere with possession without following due process and closed miscellaneous petitions.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed not to interfere with petitioner's possession of subject property without following due process; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

Syed Sadaq S/o.Syed Ahmed Vs State of Telangana Rep. by… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K, SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:9325 OF 2017

¶7

Between:

¶8

Syed Sadaq S/o.Syed Ahmed, Occ Business, Rl/o.H.NNo.12-1-79118, NRI Colony, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District.

¶9

AND

¶10

...PETIT|ONER

¶11

State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue, Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Nizamabad District at Nizamabad.

¶13

The Tahsildar Nizamabad (North) tvlandal, Nizamabad District

¶14

The Station House Offiber P.S.Nizamabad Rural, Nizamabad, District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 oI 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the 3rd respondent and its officials in trying to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land under sy.no.297 admeasuring Ac.0-18 gts., situated at Sarangpoor Village, Nizamabad Mandal, Nizamabad District, without following due procedure contemplated under law, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional, violation of principles of natural justice and also contrary to the provisions under Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and the rules made thereunder, and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject property, without following the procedure contemplated under law.

¶17

l.A. NO: 1 OF 20a7(WPMP. NO: 11557 OF 2017 )

¶18

Petition under Section 1 5 1 CPC praying that in the ci-cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to dispossess or interfere with peaoeful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the under sy.no.297 admeasuring Ac.0-18 gts., situated at Sarangpoor Village, Nizamabad Mandal, Nizamabad District, without following the procedure contemplated under law, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶19

counseI for the Petitioner: SRI MOHD.MOIN AHMED QUADRT Counse lforthe Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: AGP FOR REVENUE counse I for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR HOME

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE K.SARATH

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.9325 of 2OL7

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and' learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the entire material on record.

¶25

2, Learned Counsel lor the petitioner submits that this writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the action of the respondent No.3 and its ofhcials in trying to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.O-18 guntas in Sy.No.297, situated at Sarangpoor Village, Nizamabad Mandal, Nizamabad District, without following due procedure as contemplated under law.

¶26

Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that while admitting, this Court granted interim orders on f O.O.ZOf Z directing the respondents not to interfere with

¶27

¶28

sIr'J w.P.No.9325^{oJ 2017}

¶29

the possession^{of the petitioner over the subject property'} without following^{due process of law' In spite of lapseof} more than 8^{years, the respondentsdid no- choose to file} any counter^{in this matter for denying the a"rerments made} in the writ affidavit^{and requestedto direct tne respondents} not to interfere^{with the possessionof the petitioner'} without following^{due process of 1aw'}

¶30

Learned Assistant^{Government Pleaderfor Revenue} submits that the^{resPondents willfollow the Procedure} interfe.'ing with^the contemplated under^{1aw before} possession of the^{petitionerin the} subject proPertl'^and pass appropriate orders.

¶31

In view of the submissions^{made by both sides' the} writ petition is disposed^{of directing the respondentsnot to} interfere w'ith the^{possession of the petitionrrrin the subject} property, without following^{due processofl rrr'r" There sha-ll} be no order as to costs.

¶32

¶33

¶34

srr,J W.P.No.932S oI 201Z

¶35

6 As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if

¶36

aly, shall stand closed.

¶37

//rRUE coPY/t

¶38

SD/- T.VIJAY KUMAR DEPUF( BEGISTRAR / YW ,/

¶39

SECYION OFFICER

¶40

¶41

1 Principal Secretary, Revenue, Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

¶42

2 The District Collector, Nizamabad District at Nizamabad. J The Tahsildar Nizamabad (North) Mandal, Nizamabad District. 4 The Station House Officer P.S.Nizamabad Rural, Nizamabad, District. 5 One CC to SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRI, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶43

7 Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

B Two CD Copies

PSK TKS o

HIGH COURT

DATED:1110612025

ORDER

WP.No.9325 o12017

'.i-
/' ., 1'|l ..:A (r_- <br>f.
rl$ sEP UEi i:
,i , _ tl
.i" ..,]

¶51

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶52

<br>I
L

Syed Sadaq S/o.Syed Ahmed v. State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Sadaq S/o.Syed Ahmed v. State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue

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

Sherla Naresh Balaji, Vs The State of Telangana

N.V.R. Murthy Vs The State of Telangana

N. Bharathi Vs The State of Telangana

Mogulla Krishna Murthy, S/o. Late. Mogulla Venkata Narsaiah, Vs State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Mr.Mohammed Sultan Mohiuddin Vs The State of Telangana

Katanguri Vishnuvardhan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana