Telangana High Court
WP/31132/2026 of Parvathaneni Ramesh Vs The State of Telangana on 22 September 2026
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI WRIT PETITION NO: 31132 OF 2026 Between: Parvathaneni Ramesh, S/o.Satyanarayana, aged 58
132s7 I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI
WRIT PETITION NO: 31132 OF 2026
Between:
Parvathaneni Ramesh, S/o.Satyanarayana, aged 58 years Occ. Agriculture, R/o Ganeshpadu Village Dammapeta Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department Secretariat, Hyderabad
2. The District Collector (Tribal Welfare), Bhadradri Kothagudem District at Kothagudem
3. The Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), Bhadrachalam, Bhadradri
4. The Additional Agent to the Government, (Project Officer, ITDA), Bhadrachalam Bhadradri Kothagudem District
5. The Tahsildar, Dammapeta mandal Bhadradri Kothagudem District
6. Yaragorla Mallaiah, S/o. Satyam Aged 58 years, Occ. agriculture, R/o. Ganeshpadu Village Dammapeta Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District
7. Y aragorla Lakshmaiah, S/o. Narayanudu @ Naraiah Aged 50 years, Occ. agriculture, Rp. Ganeshpadu Village Dammapeta Mandal, Bhadradri
...RESPONDENTS
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 a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of ltrtandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in passing the Order in LTR Case No.
17l2025lDPT, dated '18.C3.2025 by directing the official respondents to resume the land under schedule to the gcvernment, of the petitioner agricultural lands situated in Sy No.
27 admeasuring Ac.6.0t) gts situated at Ganesh Padu Village, Dammapeta Mandal, Bhadradri Kotahgudem [)istrict wherein the existing paddy and cotton crops cultivated by the petitioner withoLrl considering pending of Ctr/A SR No.1431 ot 2026 pending before the 4th respondert is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19,21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia by setting aside the Order dated 18.03.2025 and consequently to direct the respondents 2 to 5 not to interfere into the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the agriculture lands of the petitioner without following due process of law, in the interest of justice
l.A. NO: 1OF 2026
Petitron under Seclion I5'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support cf the petition, the High Court may be pleased to STAY the operation of the Order passed by the 3rd respondent, Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), Bhadrachalam in LTR Case No 17l2025lDPT, dated 18.03.2025, pending disposal of the main writ l)etition, Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DANNANA THARUN KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: AGP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 and 7: --- The Court made the follcwing: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI
WRIT PETITION No.31132 ot 2026
(CNR No.HBHC01 0640352026)
22ND SEPTEMBER 2026
Between:
Parvathaneni Ramesh
.. petitioner
AND
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department. Secretariat, Hyderabad and six others . Responde:nts This Writ Petttion is filed seeking the following relief "to issuc a \\'rit Oldcr or l)irection more particrrlarl_r orre in the naturc ol Writ ol \'landamus clcclalirrr,. tll! arti,-)n ol thc -lrcl IcsPondcnl in passirg the OrJcr irr t.I R ('itrc \o l7 l0l5"t)P I tlarcr-l 18 () j 1025 b!
dirccting tlrc otlicial rcsptrn,.lcnts L() r,..sLrrc the luttd Ltttdcr'
schcclulc to tlte g,rrcrntrcnt ol thc pctitionct .rgrictrlttrlal lands sitrtatcd Irr Sr \o ll lclnrclr:ttling \c 6 00 gts situlted at ( rIncsh I)adu Villallu l)rtrrrnrapcta \larttlal Uhadradr i Kolahgrtdem [)istlict u ltcrein thc existing paddy ilncl a,rnon crop\ culli\irt.d lrr tlrc ltglrtipttcr rtthout cor.,idcrttrg pcnilinL ot C \'l \ \l{ \r, I ll I rrl l016 Pcndirts belir|c thc lllr rlJ5por(lenl i: rllcg;rl rtr'bitrarr artl lgaiDst thc principles ol naluml .jLr:tice and alsit r,iolatire ol'Article.s l4 l9 2l and l00A olConstitutiorr of Irrdia by settingasidc tlre Order clated l8 0l 2025 and conseqLrently to direct the respondents I to 5 not to intert'ere into tlrc peacetirl possession and cnjovrnent of the agricultLrre lands of thc petitioner rrithout Ibllowins dLre proccss o{' lau in the intcrcst ol iLr\ticc"
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:
wr r1rl2 2025 02 Heard Ulr. Dannana Tharun Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner anc learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare. appearing for respondent Nos.'1 to 3. Perused the record
03. The cas.e of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.6-00 in Sy.No.27, situated at Ganesh Padu Village, Dammapeta Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem fistrict According to the petitioner, the said property originally belcnged to his father, who purchased the same in the year 1968, anC since then, for nearly six decades, the petiltoner and his family have been in possession and enjoyment of the said property He lurther contended that, after the demise of his father, he succeeded to the said property and has been in possession and enjoyment thereof, and that his name has also been recorded in the revenue records. He further submitted that respondent Nos.6 and 7 have no right title or interest over the said property and that they have illegally initiated an LTR case before the 3rd resoondent. lt is further conterrded that the 3rd respondent, without issuing any notice to the 5>etitioner or affording him an opportunity to submit his explanation rlr counter. passed the order dated 18032026, directing the official respondents to resume the said land to the Government. ,\ccording to the petitroner, the said order was passed lustrce luvvadr Sr devr wp r1132 2025 without following the due process of law and in violation of Regulation 1 of 1970, and that the transaction in question is not hit by the said Regulation He further submitted that, aggrieved by the sard order, he has preferred an appeal before the 4th respondent and that the same is pending consideration. He further submitted that, during the pendency of the said appeal, the official respondents, along with the unofficial respondents, are interfering with his possession and agricultural operations and are also attempting to damage the existing crop He contended that, if he is evicted from the said land during the pendency of the appeal, he would suffer irreparable loss and hardship
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner, irrespective of the contentions urged in the writ petition, submitted that the official respondents are trying to evict the petitioner from his land basing on the impugned proceedrngs, even though Civil Miscellaneous Appeal which has been preferred. aggrreved by the impugned proceedings is pending for adjudication and limited his prayer seeking a direction for expeditious disposal of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and in the meanwhile sought for stay of the operation of impugned proceedings
05. On the other hand learned Assistant Government Pleader did not dispule th 3 pendency of the Civil [tr'liscellaneous Appeal before the concernec authority and left it to the discretion of the Court for passing appropriate orders 06 Having to the regard to the submissions made by the either counsel, and upon perusal of the record, it is not in dispute that the impugned proceedings were challenged before the concerned authority vrd: C It/ A SR.No 143 of 2026 Though, Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is pending, the officrals respondents ate proceeding to evict the petitioner from the possession of his land, which is prima facie illegal
07. ln that rriew of the matter. this Court deems it appropriate to direct the conr:erned authority to dispose of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal AS expeditiously as poss ble unrnfluenced by any of the observations rnade in this order. in accordance with aw Till the disposal of the main Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, the operation of the impugned proceedings LTR Case No.17l2025lDPT, dated 18.03.2025 passed by Respondent No.3 shall remain stayed. There shall no order as to costs wjr I1l l2 70)6
l!n ce luwadi Sndevr wp 311t2 2026 08 with the above observations and direction, this writ petition is disposed of Pending miscellaneous applications, rf any, shall stand closed SD/. A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT GIS R //TRUE COPY// SE N OFFICER
1. The Prl Secretary, The State of Telangana' Tribal Welfare Department To, TJ GJP
|)
4. b
Secretariat, HYderabad The DiStriCt Collector (Tribal Welfare), Bhadradri Kothagudem District at Kothagudem The Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare)' Bhadrachalam' Bhadradri Kothagudem District The Additional Agent to the Government' (Project Officer' ITDA)' Bhadrachalam Bhadradri Kothagudem District The Tahsildar, Dammapeta mandal Bhadradri Kothagudem District One CC to Sri Dannana Tharun Kumar' Advocate [OPUCI Two CCs to GP for Social Welfare' High Court for the State of Telangana' at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD CoPies Y\,
HIGH COURT CC TODAY DATED: 22109,t2026
ORDER
WP.No.31132,tt 2026 DISPOSING OIF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. L r\rt- sr4IS 26 sEP 202E za .'} .4 .t .:* *-=-_:-!,-_ 1r rcP?ea L F{-- 5at{cu L)