Telangana High Court
WP/46180/2016 of Siddiqua Sultana, Vs The State of Telangana, represented by Its Principal on 29 December 2016
SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 46180 of 2016 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue. 2. With the consent of both the parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage. 3. The present Writ Petition came to
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR W RI T PETI TI ON No. 4 6 1 8 0 of 2 0 1 6
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.
2. With the consent of both the parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage.
3. The present Writ Petition came to be filed with the following prayer:
‘For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is hereby prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings dated 29.08.2016 as illegal, holding that the inaction of respondent No.3 in not taking up and disposing of the interlocutory application filed by the petitioners on 17.10.2016 seeking the relief in the nature of a direction to the respondent Nos.5 and 6 not to alter or change the physical features of the land covered by Survey No.60, admeasuring Acs.17.18 guntas, situated at Mamidpally Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Now Balapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and to preserve the same during the pendency of the case No.A2/ 2689/ 2016 before respondent No.3, as illegal and arbitrary and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case’.
4. Though various grounds are raised, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though they filed an Interlocutory Application in case No. A2/ 2689/ 2016 before the Spl.Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer/ Inams Tribunal, Kandukur Division, Ranga Reddy District, T.S. - respondent No.3, till date no orders are passed. He submits that respondents are trying to change the nature of the land in dispute and as such he pleads for passing of an order in the I.A.
5. Learned Government Pleader submits that if no orders are passed till date, a direction may be given for passing of orders in the said I.A., at the earliest.
6. Having regard to the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to pass orders in I.A. filed along with case No. A2/ 2689/ 2016 before respondent No.3, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, after hearing the petitioner and all the aggrieved persons, in accordance with law.
7. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
JUSTI CE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR