Allowed

B. P. Agarwal v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Jan 2026WP/581/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a Tahsildar's endorsement rejecting their application to regularize Ac.3.00 gts of land in Kokapet Village under G.O.Ms.No.59. The court found the endorsement was issued without assigning proper reasons and set it aside, allowing the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Impugned endorsement rejecting regularization application set aside; liberty to work out remedies under law; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

B. P. Agarwal Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

[^32ee ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 581 OF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 8...P. Aganalal S/o. Late Sri Nagarmal, Age 75 years, Occ Business, 7 R/o. Villa No. 1. Prazanta Villas Attapur Hyderibad.

¶10

Z 9qryC Jai Singh S/o lnder Singh, Age 46 years. Occ Business, R/o H No 4_ 2-620. Ramkoti Hyderabad

¶11

Jithender Yadav, S/o. Late Sri Hari Om prakash yadav, Age 40 years, Occ Business, R/o. Osmangunl, Hyderabad.

¶12

Devashish^ Agarwa!, S/o._ Suresh Kumar Agarwal, Age 31 years, Occ Busrness, R/o. Villa No. 1, Prazanta Villas, Attaflur, UyderSbad.

¶13

.PETITIONERS

¶14

AND

¶15

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad

¶16

2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Kogarakallan

¶17

3 The Tahsildar, Gandipet mandal, Ranga Reddy District 4 The Hyderabad metropolitan Development Authority, Rep by its Commissioner. Swarhajayanti Complex, Ameerpet.'Hyderatjad.

¶18

5 90E99^{E^ducationalManagementPvt Limited, Rep by its ManagingDirector,} Level -2, Raheja Centre, Point 294, CST Road, B.K.C., MumbaillvlSharashtra - 400098

¶19

..RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue order or orders or direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of TVIANDAMUS declaring action of the respondents No. 1 to 3 rejecting the application of the petitioners for regularization and communicating the same through 3rd respondent file No. Bl1034/2025, dated 11 .12.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, malafide, intentional and particularly to get over the interim

¶21

¶22

order dated 03.11.2025 in wP No 3714812025 and cons -,quenily set aside the same as illegal in the interests of justice

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶24

Petition under section 15,l cpc praying that in the :ircunrstances statecl in the affidavit filed in support of the petrtion, the High co rrt may be pleased ber pleased drrect the respondents No. '1 to 5 not to disposs,:;s the petitioners fronr their land of Ac. 3 00gts in Sy. No 117/E of Kokapet Vil z ge Gandipet tvlandal Ranga Reddy District pending disposal of the writ peti iin in the interests o. justice

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI K. SAI SRI HARSHA

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: SRI RAHUL REDtr. ', SPL. GP FOR REI/ :NUE

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI V. NARASIMHA G: UD, SC FOR HMDA

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.S: - - - -

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶30

¶31

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶32

AT HYDERABAD

¶33

TIIE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.581 of 2026

¶34

Dated: O9.01. 2026

¶35

Between:

¶36

B. P.Agaru,al and three others

¶37

Petitioners

¶38

And

¶39

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secrerary, Revenue Department and lour others

¶40

Respondents

¶41

ORDER

¶42

This Writ Petition is filed unrler Article 226 of Constitution

¶43

of India seeking the follou.ing reliel/ s: -

¶44

"... to issue order or orders or direction or wrtt more particularly one in the nature of $.rit of MANDAMUS declaring action of the respondenrs No.1 to 3 rejecting the application of the petitioners for regr,rlariza tior., ,*d io--inicatrn! the same tT:lS!^{3,c respondenr fileNo.Bi lO34l2025,dared} 17.12.2025 as illegal, arbitrary., malalide, intentional and particularly to get ovel-the interim order dated 03.11.2025 rn W.P.No.37148/2025 and opposed to the established principles of natural justtce ard consequcntly set aside the same as illegal in the interests oljustici ard pass a_ll necessar1r orders

¶45

Heard Mr.K.V.Bhanu prasacl, ie:rrned senior counsel

¶46

representing Mr. Kothapalli Sai Sri Harsha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rahul Reddy, learned Special

¶47

Government Pleader appearing for respondents. perused thg_

record.

I I It 1 i

Learned counsei for the petitioners sub,: i s; titat irr simtlar circumstarrces, this Court, on 03.12.2025 ,.tt /.p.No.371zi8 ol 2C25, passed:rn interim orcler. The operativc 1r ltion ol the said order is extracLed as hereunder:-

¶53

"ln the above circumstalces, it is made cl.ar thii ruction if airv conductcd pursuant to the notifrcation dated -1.11.20fJ i; respect ol the subject propcrtv shall bc subjer:L r lhc ciisposal of the .regularization application date.t i9.01 ()15 jif an], pending) and subject to the result of this writ peti j )r-r. List on 21 .12.2025".

¶54

He further states that pending Writ per I on. respondent No.3 had issued the impugned Enclors: : t:nl- r.ide File llo.BllO34 12025 dated 12.12.2025. The operari.(: porrion of rhe same is extracted as under:-

¶55

"[n vieu, of t]re above, the application file,j by J.ou ror regularizatron of the Government lald to an c\ t r r of {c.3,OO gts in Sy.No. i 77 /pxt of Kokapet Village, Gand ir,, t IVI a;,rcl:rl i s not considerable.

¶56

Hence, this endorsement..

¶57

He further states that on 19.01.20 15, the pc,ri icners filed an applica-tion for regularization of Acs.3.O0 i,1 s of land in Sy.No.117 /A of Kokapet Village, Gandipet Mand: , Ranga Reddy District as per G.O.Ms.No.59 Revenue iAssignment_li) Department dated 30.12.2014 enclosing a cheq_: for a sum of

¶58

Rs. 1,12,50,000/- and that respondent No.3 had issued the impugned Endorsment in File No.BllO34 12025 dated 17.12.2025 after the ordcr dated 03.12.2025 passed by this Court in V1.P.No.37 148 of 2025 u,hich is contran, to lar,r,. Therefore, he seeks to allorv Lhe ,Vrit Petition.

¶59

Learned Special Cor.ernment Pleader submits that the Mardal Girdau.ar, Gandipet Mandal vide report dated 15.12.2025 submitted that the land admeasuring Acs.3.00 gts in Sy.No.117 of Kokapet Village r,r'as alreadr. allotted to the HMDA authorities arrd that it u'as under the ph,vsical possession of the authorities. Upon conducting thorough enquiry respondent No.3 had passed the impugned Bndorsement in File No.B/l$a 12025 dated 17.12.2025. Therefore, he contends that no perversitl' can be attributed to the impugned Endorsement dated 17 .12.2025.

¶60

He further states that the purport of G.O.lvls.No.59 dated 30.12.2014 for regularization of lands mealt for residential purposes is as under:-

¶61

Possession up to 250 scluare yards: 50% ol the Basic Value as on 02.06.2014,

¶62

Possession up to 5OO square yards: 7 5o/o of the Basic Value as on 02.06.2014

¶63

Possession above 5OO square yards: Basic Value as on * 02.06.2014.

¶64

¶65

I I I I I i I I I I I i I J l l

¶66

He coniends that the petitioners have submilr _. I arr appl ication for regularization of Acs.3.00 gts of iand in S1-.,, .1 17 of i(okapet Village ald so, the case of the petitioners l )es nct fail lor consiueratioli rvithin the ambit of the said ( l. ). rLnd that ihe cheque enclosed L.-r, tl:e petitioner does not sr. r. ..: alnv pLlrpose. Hence, he states that instead of filing 1r ' rcgularization appJication, the petitioners ought to have I leci an on-line application, as per lau,, along u,ith the Dema:: Draft clrarvn i r-r anv of lhe nationalized Bank seeking the said :r lief. Ratl-rer, the petitioners lushed to this Court ald filed rl e'prescnt Writ Petition. Stating thus, he seeks to dismiss this ,i -'t Petition-

¶67

7 . Having regard to the submissions of L r th the lcarned ccunsel and on perllsal of the material availab.e cn record, this Court is of the opinion that pending W.P.(p.l.l, ) No 109 of 2Oi6 and batch and W.P.(P.I.L.).No.B of 2O15 betr re the Honbie Division Bench of this Court, the impugned Errl rrsement in File No.BlIO34 12025 dated 17.12.2025 is issuec by responcient No.3 '"vithout assigning proper reasons. Thereic r :, this Court is inclined to set aside the Endorsement in File I'l ).8 / 1034 /2025 dated 17.12.2025.

¶68

"^{. -,..:=.-. .. .:l: ,-:,;:-}

¶69

.r ,"r-all

¶70

¶71