Disposed

Smt. Gurram Kondamma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Jan 2026WP/16154/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners alleged revenue authorities were attempting to dispossess them from their house despite an earlier writ directing status quo and submission of explanation to a vacate notice. The High Court disposed of the writ petition directing respondents not to interfere with petitioners' possession except by following due process of law, without costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Gurram Kondamma Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

[^32e9 ]

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 16154 OF 2o2s

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Gurram Kondamma, Wo. Ramulu, R/o. H.No.1-60/30/223l135, Anjaiah Nagar, Gachibowli Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶9

G. Gelivaiah, S/o Ramulu, Aged about 50^years, Occ. Business, R/o^{H No.1-} 6013012231135, Anjaiah Nag-r, Gachibowli Village, Serilingampally^Mandal, Ranga Reddy Districl PlN. 50003?

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

ANO

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue^Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, P.lN. 500022

¶13

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State, PlN.⁵⁰¹⁵⁰¹

¶14

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Ranga Reddy^District, Telangana State, 501503

¶15

The Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, 500008

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed thi:rewith, the High^{Court maybe} pleased to issue Writ, Order or Direction, or any other appropriate Order oneⁱⁿ the nature of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS, to declare the action^{of the Respondents} continuously interfering into the^{peaceful possession} and^{enjoymentof the:} Petitioner over H.No.1-6013012231135, Anjaiah Nagar, Gachibowli^Village' Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, without issuing any^{Notice and} without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and^violationof principles of natural justice consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere into the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner over^H.No.

¶18

1-6013012231135, Anjaiah Nagar, Gachibowli Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶19

(Prayer amended as per C.O dt.07-01-2026 in l.A NO.2/2025)

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

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 not to interfere into the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner over H.No.l- 6013012231135, Anjaiah Nagar, Gachibowli Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy Diskict, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition.

¶22

(Prayer amended as per C.O d1.07-01-2026 in l.A NO.2/2025)

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SYED MUSAB RAHIM HASHMI

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K.MURALIDHAR REDDY, GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶26

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

¶27

DATE OF ORDER: OZ.OI .20126

¶28

Between:

¶29

Smt. Gurram Kondamma and another

¶30

...Petitioners

¶31

AND

¶32

The State of Telangana,

¶33

Rep. by its principal Secretary,

¶34

Revenue Department, secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, and 3 others

¶35

...Respondents

¶36

ORDER

¶37

This Writ petition, under Article 226 of the

¶38

constitution of India, is fited seeking the.folrowing rerieft

¶39

" ""to issue writ, order or Direction or any other appr<tpriate order ,ne in the nature of a I,RIT OF MANDAMLIS to decr,re the acri<tn ttf the Respctndents continuously interfering into the peacefut possession and enjoyment ,f the Petirioner over H.No.I-60/30/223/r3 lniiiah Nagar, cacirio.ti viltage, serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, withour issuing any Notice and without following due process of raw as ilregar arbitrary ancr vioratictn of principles of nutural justice consequently direcr the Respondents not to interfere ilto the peacefut possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over H.No.l_ 60/30/223/13 Anjaiah Nagar, Gachtbowri vittage, seriringompaily Mandat, Ruygct Reddy Dtstrict...,,

¶40

Page 2 of3

¶41

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri K.Muralidhar Reddy, learned Government pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4; and perused the record.

¶42

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are in possession of propert5r bearing H.No. 1- 60/30/223/ 135, Anjaiah Nagar, Gachibowli Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that when the respondents issued notice directing the petitioners to vacate from the subject property, the petitioners were constrained to approach this Court by instituting W.P.No.2767a of 2OlL and this Court by order dated 07.lO.2Ol1, disposed of the said writ petition directing the petitioners to submit explanation to the said notice and by granting status quo in respect of the subject property. The grievance of the petitioners is that even after the directions of this Court, the respondents are visiting their. house and trying to dispossess them from the subject house without following due process

¶43

of law. Hence, this writ petition. - .'-' -4 -/

¶44

Page 3 of3

¶45

Learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 submitted that the petitioners have approached this Court only on apprehension, and the respondent authorities have not interfered with the subject property.

¶46

In the light of the aforesaid submissions, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to interfere into the possession of the petitioners in respect of the subject property, without following due process of law. There sha-ll be no order as to costs.

¶47

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.

¶48

Sd/.P.PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, PlN. 500022

¶54

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State, PlN. 501501

¶55

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State, 501503

¶56

The Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, 500008

¶57

One CC to SRI SYED MUSAB RAHIM HASHMI, Advocate [OPUC]

¶58

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad . [OUTI

¶59

Two CD Copies

PMK

BS Ml

HIGH COURT

DATED:0710112026

I
t
'.iH g STA
.<
,]) I $ Jlr 16 C)
t(
n'
ft...." ^,.+o-
7.-/'

¶65

ORDER

¶66

WP.No.16154 of 2025

¶67

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶68

WITHOUT COSTS

¶69

1.%

Smt. Gurram Kondamma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt. Gurram Kondamma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muddangula Sattaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Butti Raj Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Jangili Simhaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Bobbili Bhaskar Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Kamireddy Rachana Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Chityala Vijaya Alias Kalluri Rajeshwari Vs The State of Telangana