WP/9605/2011 of PEDHI MALLAIAH, R.R. DIST. Vs DIST.COLLECTOR, R.R. DIST. AND 2 ORS. on 31 December 2024

1. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad East Division, Ranga ReddyDistrict.District.

3. The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

,...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 ot the constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may bepleased to issue a wril, order or direction more particularly one in the nature ofwrit of Mandamus deciaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.g5, admeasuring 300Sq.yards, in Sy.No.283144, situated at Abdullahpur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal,writ of Mandamus deciaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.g5, admeasuring 300Sq.yards, in Sy.No.283144, situated at Abdullahpur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal,Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Article 14, 21 and 300_A of Constitutionof lndia.A of Constitutionof lndia.

l.A. NO: 1 0F 2011(WPtitP. NO: 11886 0F 2011)

Petition under section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in suppo( of the petition, the High court may be pleased torestrain the Respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitionerover the plot No.95, admeasuring 300 Sq.yards, in Sy.No.2g3l44, situated atAbdullahpur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

I

I

l

Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR REVENUE

WRIT PETITIONNO: 9608 0F 2011

Between:

N.Murali Krishna Prasad Rao, S/o N.Hanumantha Rao, aoed about 34 vears.O-cc:Business, Rl/o. Flat No.103, 1st Floor, Snivi"i-nesd-enir. d;;;Vijayalaxmi Theater, Sri Ram Nagar Colony, HVaeraOjO.

...PETITIONER

AND

1The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

2The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad East Division, Ranga ReddyDistrict.District.

TheTahsildar, Hayathnagar mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

J

Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may bepleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature ofwrit of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd responderit in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.70lA, admeasuring 100Sq.yards, in Sy.no.2B3l44, situated at Abdullahpur Village, Hayathnagar mandal,Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Article 14,21 and3oo-A of Constitution of lndia.pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature ofwrit of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd responderit in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.70lA, admeasuring 100Sq.yards, in Sy.no.2B3l44, situated at Abdullahpur Village, Hayathnagar mandal,Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Article 14,21 and3oo-A of Constitution of lndia.

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO : 11889 OF 2011)

Petition under section 15i cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased torestrain the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitionerover the plot NO.70lA, admeasuring [.l00Sq.yards, ]in Sy.no.2g3l44, situated atAbdullahpur village, Hayathanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.KRANTI KUMAR REDDy

(

WRIT PETITION NO :9617 OF 2011

Between:

Kailash Singh, S/o. Banarsi Lal,g.ged about 39 years, Occ:Business, R/o.H No. 13-1-1063, Gandhi BaithakUpper Dhoolpet, Hyderabad.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad

2. The Revenue Divisionar officer, Hyderabad East Division, Ranga ReddyDistrictDistrict

3. The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District .,.RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may bepleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature ofwrit of mandamus decraring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.10i, admeasuring 200sq. Yards in sy.No.283144 situated at Abdu[ahpur viilage, Flayathnagar Mandar,Ranga Reddy District as arbitrary, iilegar, and viorative of Articre 14,21 and 300-A of Constitution of lnrlia.writ of mandamus decraring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.10i, admeasuring 200sq. Yards in sy.No.283144 situated at Abdu[ahpur viilage, Flayathnagar Mandar,Ranga Reddy District as arbitrary, iilegar, and viorative of Articre 14,21 and 300-A of Constitution of lnrlia.

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 11898 0F 20 11 )

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 11898 0F 20 11 )

Petition under Section i 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased torestrain the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitionerover the Plot No.101. admeasuring 200 sq. yards in Sy.No.2B3l44 situated atAbdullahpur village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.KRANT| KUMAR REDDY

Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR REVENUEthe Respondents: AGp FOR REVENUE

WRIT PETITION NO: 9626 0F 2011

Between:

AbdulR7o 1 ['t-][9gj9q9, ]21-662. nerrr [Sio ]Darga, [Abdut ]Nf [Lateef, ]R NagaiHyOeianiO.-[aged ][about ][34 ][years, ][Occ:Business,]R7o 1 ['t-][9gj9q9, ]21-662. nerrr [Sio ]Darga, [Abdut ]Nf [Lateef, ]R NagaiHyOeianiO.-[aged ][about ][34 ][years, ][Occ:Business,]

ryt

t

AND

1The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.2,The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad East Division, Ranga ReddyDistrict.2,The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad East Division, Ranga ReddyDistrict.

3TheTahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.TheTahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 2zG of the constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may bepleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature ofwrit of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.70iB, admeasuring [-100]Sq.yards, in Sy.no.283/44, situated at Abdullahpur Village, Hayathnagar mandal,Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of ARticle 14,21 and3oo-A of Constitution of lndia.the possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.70iB, admeasuring [-100]Sq.yards, in Sy.no.283/44, situated at Abdullahpur Village, Hayathnagar mandal,Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of ARticle 14,21 and3oo-A of Constitution of lndia.

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: '11909 OF 2011)

Petition under Section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased torestrain the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitionerover the plot No.70/B, admeasuring 10oSq.yards, in Sy.no.283l44, situated atAbdullahpur village, Hayathanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

WRIT PETITION NO: 9630 OF 2011

Between:

plrlf"t .Singh, S/o. Banarsi Lal, aged about 42 years, Occ:BusinessRl/o.Abdullapur village Hayathnagar Mandal Ranga Redby Diitrict

...PETITIONER

AND

The District Coltector, at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad

2. The RevenueDivisional officer, Hyderabad East Division, Rlnga ReddyDistrictDistrict

3. The TahsildarHayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Ranga ReddyDistrict

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stateri in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may bepleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature ofwrit of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.94, admeasuring 300Sq.yards, in Sy.no.283144, situated at Abduilahpur Viilage, Hayathnagar mandar,Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Article 14, 21 and3oo-A of Constitution of lndia.writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering withthe possession of the petitioner herein over the plot No.94, admeasuring 300Sq.yards, in Sy.no.283144, situated at Abduilahpur Viilage, Hayathnagar mandar,Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Article 14, 21 and3oo-A of Constitution of lndia.

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(Wll MP. NO: 11914 oF 2011)

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased torestrain the Respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitionerover the plot No.94 admeasuring 300 sq.yards in sy.No.zesl44 situated atAbdullapur village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

The Gourt made the following: COMMON ORDER

I

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATHWRIT PETITION Nos.96O5 9607 9608 96t7 9626 9630 of20tt

COMMON ORDER:

Heard learned counsel lor the petitioners, LearnedAssistant Government Pleader for Revenue for therespondents and perused the entire material on records.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that thesubject matters in these writ petitions are connected withthe orders passed in W.P.Nos. 18986 of 2O 10 and batch andthe same were disposed of on 05.lO.2Ol2 and requested topass similar orders in these writ petitions as well.3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenueappearing for the respondents has not disputed about thesubmissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners.4. In view of the submissions made by both sides, allthe writ petitions are allowed by following the orders,lpassed by this Court in W.P.Nos. 18986 of 20l0 and batch,dated O5.lO.2Ol2, by directing the respondents not tointerfere with the plots in occupation ol the writ petitionerstill the lresh resumption orders to the extent of the vvrit II

)

petitioners ar(-. passed after putting them on notice underthe provisions of the Andhra pradesh Assigned Lands(Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 1977. No order as to costs.

Misr:t'llaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closedThat Rule Nisi has made Absolute [as above ][witness]The Hon'ble SRI ALOK [ARADHE, The ][Chief ][Justice ][on ][this ][Tuesday, ][the ][Thirty]{tFirst Day of December, Two Thousand [and ][Twenty ][Four.]

SD/-T. JAYASREEASsrsrtsREGISTRAR,TRUE COPY//SECTION OFFICER

To,

1. The District Collector, Ranga [Reddy District at ][Lakdikapool, ][Hyderabad]

2. The Revenue Divisional [Officer, ][Hyderabad ][East ][Division, ][Ranga ][Reddy]DistrictDistrict

3. The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar [Mandal, Ranga Reddy District]

4. One CC to SRI A.KRANTI KUMAR [REDDY, ][Advocate ][OPUC]

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

6. Two CD CopiesTwo CD CopiesCopies

6. Two CD CopiesTwo CD CopiesCopiesBSRBS v-- BSR

HIGH COURT

DATED: 31112t2024

1$E [SIA ]aco,+)ol)1 B FE3 2[25al\1r,,.\\D['.spa rC,d[t.!)]

COMMON ORDERWP.Nos.9605, 9607, 9608, 9617, 9626, 9630 OF 2011

ALLOWING ALL THE WRIT PETITTONS,

WITHOUT COSTS

t?Il,//

I

I