Telangana High Court
WP/32641/2026 of Sankineni Laxman Rao Vs The Government of Telangana on 29 September 2026
THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 32641 0F 2026 Between: Sankineni Laxman Rao, S/o. Late.
[ 33041
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 32641 0F 2026
Between:
Sankineni Laxman Rao, S/o. Late. Hanumantha Rao, Aged about 53 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. H.No.2-135, Thungathurthy Village and Mandal, Suryapet District.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The Government of Telangana, Rep by its principal Secretary, panchayath Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. The District Panchayath Officer, Suryapet District.
3. The Mandal Panchayath Officer, Thungathurthy Mandal, Suryapet District.
4. The Panchayath Secretary, Thungathurthy Gram panchayath, Suryapet District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Arlicle 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 appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of wRlr oF MANDAMUS against the Respondent Authorities herein to consider the Representation, Dt. 01-09-2026 submitted to the Respondent No.4 and the Representation, Dt. 02-09-2026 submitted to the Respondent No.3 to revise the construction permission as per the plan submitted by the petitioner to the extent of Eastern boundary, which is illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice.
l.A. NO: 'l OF 2026
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 stay all further proceedings by directing the Respondent Authorities herein Not to proceed with the Notice-'l , Dt. 30-06-2026 and Notice-2, Dt. 17-09-2026 issued by the Respondent No.4 in respect of the petitioneis property i.e. "Siri Function Hall Property" n the Eastern Boundary, pending disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI GOLI VIPLAV REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2:
AGP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4: SRI PRADEEP REDDY KATTA, SC FOR ZPP, MPP & GRAM PANCHAYATS
The Court made the following: ORDER
I
I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
DATE: 29.09.2026
WRIT PETITION No.32641 of 2026
CNR.No. HBHC01 066941 2026
Between:
Sankineni Laxman Rao
...Petitioner
AND
The Government of Telangana,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Panchayath Raj Department,
Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others.
...Respondents
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 Sri Goli Viplav Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri Pradeep Reddy Katta, learned Standing Counsel for Zilla Praja Parishads, Mandal Praja Parishads and Gram Panchayats, appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4. Perused the record.
RR'V,J W.P.No.32641 of 2026
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of Ac.1-10 Gts. in Sy.No.'1 39lAN2, Thungathurthy Village and Mandal, having acquired the same under Registered Gift Deed dated 06 12.2017, followed by mutation and issuance of Pass Book-cum-Title Deed The petitioner thereafter obtained NALA conversion permission and construction permission for "Siri Function Hall"
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, due to an inadvertent error, the eastern boundary in the sanctioned plan was shown as a 3O-feet road instead of a 12-feet open space. Based on the complaint of the neighbouring landowner, the respondents issued notices dated 30.06.2026 and 17.09.2026 directing removal of the pillars and fencing, alleging obstruction of a 30-feet road. The petitioner disputes the existence of any such road or public pathway over his patta land.
4. Learnecl counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner submitted representation dated 0'l .09.2A26 before respondent No.4 and representation dated 02.09.2026 before respondent No.3, along with a revised plan seeking correction of
RRN,J W.P-No-32641 of 2026 the eastern boundary from 30 feet to 12 feet, but the same have not been considered.
5. Therefore, learned counsel seeks a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner,s representations and revised plan in accordance with law before taking any further coercive action
6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and the material placed on record, it appears that the petitioner obtained NALA conversion and construction permission. The dispute appears to arise principally with regard to the eastern boundary, particularly the alleged existence of a 3O-feet road, which according to the petitioner was inadvertenfly shown in the sanctioned plan.
7. Since the petitioner has submitted representations dated 01 .09.2026 and 02.09.2026 along with a revised plan seeking correction of the eastern boundary in the subject plan, without expressing any opinion on the rival claims with regard to the existence or otheruyise of the alleged road, respondents 3 and 4 are directed to consider the petitioner's representations and pass
To, RRN,J W.P.No.32511 of 2026 appropriate orders, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity to all concerned
8. With the above direction, the Writ petition is disposed of There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1. The Principal Secretary, Panchayath Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Government of Telangana.
2. The District Panchayath Officer, Suryapet District.
3. The Mandal Panchayath Officer, Thungathurthy tMandal, Suryapet District.
4. The Panchayirth Secretary, Thungathurthy Gram Panchayath, Suryapet District.
5. One CC to SRI GOLI VIPLAV REDDY, Advocate IOPUC] 6 One CC to SRI PRADEEP REDDY KATTA, SC FOR ZPP, MPP & GRAM PANCHAYATS [OPUC]
7. Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]
8. Two CD Copies :::q
CC TODAY HIGH COURT DATED: 2910912026
ORDER
WP.No.32641 ot 2026 r o L4 E T ,9 j g o u- "$ > + ou \\ d J [i* DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS I e o G \\