A Venkatesh vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 2949 Tel

  THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                                     AND

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

                     Writ Appeal No.951 of 2023

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)

       Aggrieved        by     the    interlocutory          orders    dated

11.09.2023 in W.P.No.25111 of 20023 passed by the

learned Single Judge, the present Writ Appeal is filed.


2.     Heard Mr. Challa Gunaranjan, learned counsel

for the appellants and the learned Government Pleader

for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and

Mr. Mohammad Zubair Akran, learned counsel for the

contesting respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants contended

that the appellants are the owners of agriculture land

admeasuring Ac.3.20 gts in Sy.No.740/2, Ac.3.20 gts

in Sy.No.739/AA2/2 and Ac.2.07 gts in

Sy.No.739/AA/1/2 of Korremula village, Ghatkesar

Mandal, the then Ranga Reddy District (now Medhcal-

Malkajgiri District). The appellants have submitted an

application before the Revenue Divisional Officer to ::2:: AKS,J & RRN,J wa_951_2023

mutate all their names and the Revenue Divisional

Officer was pleased to mutate the names of the

appellants in the Revenue records. Thereafter, the

contesting respondents have filed W.P.No.25111 of

2022 contending that the Revenue Divisional Officer

has erroneously entered the names of the appellants in

Revenue Records and they were claiming ownership of

200 sq.yds of land situated in Sy.No.743 and they have

also submitted an application to mutate the names in

their Revenue Records, and as such, without giving

any opportunity to the contesting respondents, they

have filed the subject writ petition before this Court

and the learned Single Judge at the admission stage

itself was pleased to grant interim directions in favour

of the contenting respondents by directing the

appellants not to interfere with the peaceful possession

and enjoyment of contesting respondents' land

admeasuring Ac.3.20 gts in Sy.No.740/2, Ac. 3.20 in

Sy.No.739/AA2/2 & Ac.2.07 in Sy.No.739/AA/1/2.

The learned single Judge has mechanically granted the

interim directions in favour of the contesting ::3:: AKS,J & RRN,J wa_951_2023

respondents without appreciating the fact that the

contesting respondents were claiming their land in

Sy.No.743. But the learned Single Judge has passed

interim directions in respect of Sy.No.740/2,

Sy.739/AA/2. Admittedly, the land in Sy.No.740/2

and Sy.No.739/AA/2 & Sy.No.739/AA/1/2 belongs to

the appellants and the learned Single Judge has

granted relief more than what the contesting

respondents were seeking. Therefore, appropriate

orders be passed in the writ appeal by confining the

interim directions in respect of Sy.No.743 as being

claimed by the contesting respondents and modify the

interim orders in respect of Sy.No.740/2 and

Sy.No.739/AA/2 & Sy.No.739/AA/1/2 which belongs

to the appellants.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for contesting

respondents contended that the appellants have got

their names mutated in the Revenue Records, even

though, the claim of the contesting respondents was

pending before the Revenue Divisional Officer and the ::4:: AKS,J & RRN,J wa_951_2023

Revenue Officer without giving any opportunity to the

contesting respondents had mutated the names of the

appellants. Aggrieved by the same, the contesting

respondents have approached this court and the

learned Single Judge was justified in granting interim

directions in favour of the contesting respondents.

Therefore, there are no merits in the writ appeal and

the same is liable to be dismissed.

5. This Court having considered the rival

submissions made by the parties is of the view that the

contesting respondents were claiming interlocutory

relief in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in respect of Sy.No.743, but

the learned Single Judge had granted interim

directions in respect of Sy.No./740/2 and

Sy.No.739/AA/2 & Sy.No.739/AA/1/2. Therefore, the

learned Single Judge was not justified in granting

interim directions in respect of Sy.No.740/2 and

Sy.No.739/AA/2 & Sy.No.739/AA/1/2. Therefore, the

interim orders passed by the learned single Judge are

modified confining the relief of the contesting ::5:: AKS,J & RRN,J wa_951_2023

respondents only to the Sy.No.743 as was being

claimed in the interlocutory application submitted by

the contesting respondents.

6. With the above said observations, the Writ Appeal

is disposed of, however, it is made clear that the

appellants shall file counter in the main case and the

learned Single Judge will consider afresh the exparte

interim orders which were grated on 11.09.2023 as

expeditiously as possible. No costs.

7. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending

if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J

__________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

__

Date: 06.10.2023 prat ::6:: AKS,J & RRN,J wa_951_2023

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

AND

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

Writ Appeal No.951 of 2023

Date: 06.10.2023 prat