Telangana High Court

WP/45873/2022 of Boni Srinivasu Vs The State of Telangana on 30 December 2022

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 45873 OF 2022 Between: Boni Srinivasu, S/o B.Ch.Suryanarayana, Occ Business,

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

FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWOTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO: 45873 OF 2022

Between:

Boni Srinivasu, S/o B.Ch.Suryanarayana, Occ Business, R/o Flat No. 103,Padmaraga Apartments, Balaji Swarnapuri Colony, Mothinagar, Hyderabad-500018.Padmaraga Apartments, Balaji Swarnapuri Colony, Mothinagar, Hyderabad-500018.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by Secretary, Home Department, SecretariatBuildings, Hyderabad.Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Station House Officer, Gachibowli, Rangareddy District.

3. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal, Rangareddy Dist.

4. The Greater Hyderabad Muncipal Corporation, Rep. by its MunicipalCommissioner, Serilingampally Mandal, R.R. District.Commissioner, Serilingampally Mandal, R.R. District.

5. Rajendra Colony A & B Blocks Welfare Association, Regd. No. 203 of 2018,Kondapur, Hyderabad-84 Rangareddy District, Telangana State. Rep By itsPresidentKondapur, Hyderabad-84 Rangareddy District, Telangana State. Rep By itsPresident

...RESPONDENTS

Page 1 of 3

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 Respondents No. 2 to 4 ininterfering with peaceful possession of the property bearing Plot 337, Type-B, inSy. No. 75, admeasuring 300 sq. yards, or 250.80 sq.mts., situated at KondapurVillage, Serilingampally Mandal and Municipality, Rangareddy District is illegal,arbitrtary and against the principles of natural [justice ]and the law laid down by theHon'ble Supreme Court; lA NO: 1 OF 2022

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cirr;urrr:, tances stated inthe affidavit filed in :upport of the petition, the High Court nr.: y b,: pleased todirect the Responde rts l,lo. 2 to 4 not to interfere in the [p( ]tilionr:r's peacefulpossession of the pr, rperty bearing Plot 337, Type-8, in Sy l"lc. ,'5, admeasuring300 sq. yards, or 2:0.80 sq.mts., situated at Kondapur Villag e SerilingampallyMandal and Municip. rlity, Rangareddy District, pending disp,rs al of the main writpetition; Counsel for the Peti ioner: SRl. V T KALYAN

Counsel for the Res rondents Rl & R2: AGP FOR HOME

The Court made the lollowing: ORDER

HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDYWRIT PETITION0.45873 0F 2022

ORDER: (ORAL)

This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of therespondent Nos.2 to 4 in interfering with the peaceful possession ofthe property bearing Plot No.337, Type-B, admeasuring 300 sq. yardsor 250.80 sq. meters, situated at Kondapur Village, Serilingampallyrespondent Nos.2 to 4 in interfering with the peaceful possession ofthe property bearing Plot No.337, Type-B, admeasuring 300 sq. yardsor 250.80 sq. meters, situated at Kondapur Village, Serilingampallylvlandal and Municipality, Ranga Reddy District

Page 2 of 3

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedAssistant Government Pleader for Home, and perused the materialavailable on record.3. Based on the written instructions daled 28.12.2022 issued bythe Sub-lnspector of Police, Gachibowli Police Station, CyberabadCommissionerate, the learned Assistant Government Pleadersubmitted that respondent No.2 is no way concerned with the subjectproperty. As on today, no one has lodged a complaint against thepetitioner and there is no crime registered in the police station ofrespondent No.2. Further, it is stated that respondent No.2 neverinterfered in the civil disputes of the petitioner over the subjectproperty.

4. Learned :ounsel for the petitioner submits Ihirt in view of thestatement of res ponrlent No.2 that there is no crime re,3istered againstthe petitioner e rd lhere is no interference from ther police in anymanner, approp iate orders be passed.5. ln view oi the above, the writ petition is closeC. lf the petitionerhas any fu(her grievance, he is at liberty to approa:lr this Court atlater point of tim, r.

As a sequ, rl th,ereto, miscellaneous applications i1' any, pendingin the writ petitio r starnd closed. No order as to costs SII/.T.JAYASREEASSI-TiTANT REGISTRAR

'i!--

/iTRUE COPY'

SiEC TION OFFICER

To,

1. One CC to SRl. V T KALYAN Advocate tOpUCltOpUCl

2. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State c,f [--etangana,]Hyderabad. [OL TlHyderabad. [OL Tl

3. Two CD Copies

HIGH COURTBVRJDATED: 30112t2022E [s ][TA ].i1-/;,,:illcI [g ]J[ii [?u3]ORDERWP.No.4587i of 2022

WRIT PETITII)N IS CLOSED OF WITHOIUI COST

Page 3 of 3

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead