Nagaram Sharada vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 2030 Tel

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2030 Tel
Judgement Date : 5 September, 2023

Telangana High Court

Nagaram Sharada vs The State Of Telangana on 5 September, 2023

Bench: Alok Aradhe, N.V.Shravan Kumar

        THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                    AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR


  W.P.Nos.32081, 39102, 39466 of 2013; 156 of 2014;
      8287 of 2015; 15721 of 2017; and 10105 of 2020

COMMON ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)


       Mr. K.Venu Madhav, Mr. Raghavan K. Thalapaka,

Mr.     B.Mahender           Reddy,       Mr.     G.Ravi        Chandran,

Mr. S.Sridhar and Mr. V.Raghunath, learned counsel for

the petitioners.

       Dr. J.Vijaya Laxmi, learned Government Pleader for

Revenue (Assignment) for the revenue officials.


2.     In these writ petitions, the petitioners who claim to be

in possession of various parcels of land situated at

Jawaharnagar Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy

District, seek a direction to the revenue officials not to

interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the land of

which they claim to be in possession.
                                     2




3.     In W.P.No.32081 of 2013, it is claimed that the land

measuring Acs.12.07 guntas of Survey Nos.682, 701, 702

and    703       situated   at   Jawarharnagar      Village   Shivar,

Shamirpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, was allotted to

the    petitioner's     father    by    the   Jawaharnagar      Land

Colonisation Cooperative Society.


4.     In W.P.No.39102 of 2013, the petitioner claims that

land comprised in Survey No.668 belongs to the petitioner.


5.     Similarly, in W.P.No.39466 of 2013, the petitioners

have averred that they have constructed the houses on

land    bearing      Survey      No.706/p     of   Shanthinagar    at

Jawaharnagar Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy

District.


6.     In W.P.No.156 of 2014, the petitioners claim that

they have constructed houses on the land bearing Survey

No.474      of    Jawaharnagar         Grampanchayat,    Shamirpet

Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.


7.     Similarly, in W.P.No.8287 of 2015, it is claimed that

the land measuring Acs.5.00 and Acs.4.25 guntas in
                                     3




Survey      Nos.541      and    559     respectively      situated    at

Jawarharnagar Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy

District,    was     allotted   to      the    petitioners    by     the

Jawaharnagar Land Colonisation Cooperative Society.


8.    In W.P.No.15721 of 2017, the petitioner claims that

the land measuring Acs.11.15 guntas in Survey Nos.644,

645, 648 and 351 of Chennapur, Jawaharnagar Village,

Medchal Taluq, Ranga Reddy District, was allotted to her

father.


9.    Similarly, in W.P.No.10105 of 2020, the petitioners

claim that they have constructed residential houses on

their land measuring Acs.4.20 guntas in Survey No.720 of

Malkaram      Village,      Kapra    Mandal,        Medchal-Malkajgiri

District, and they are in peaceful possession of the same.


10.   The grievance of the petitioners as pleaded in the writ

petitions is that the respondents are trying to interfere with

their peaceful possession over the subject land.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that even

assuming that the petitioners are in unauthorised

occupation of the land in question, they cannot be

dispossessed from the land in question, except in

accordance with law.

12. The aforesaid submission has not been fairly

disputed by the learned Government Pleader for Revenue

(Assignment).

13. It is trite law that person in possession cannot be

dispossessed except in accordance with law. The Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Yeshwant Singh v. Jagdish Singh 1 in

paragraph 10 quoted with approval the decision of Privy

Council in Midnapur Zamindary Company Limited v. Naresh

Narayan Roy 2 and held that "in India persons are not

permitted to take forcible possession; they must obtain such

possession as they are entitled to through a court".

14. Similarly, in paragraph 12 of the judgment, the

Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to the decision of the

AIR 1968 SC 620

AIR 1924 PC 144

Allahabad High Court in Yar Mohammad v. Lakshmi Das 3

and held as under:

"Law respects possession even if there is no title to support it. It will not permit any person to take the law in his own hands and to dispossess a person in actual possession without having recourse to a court. No person can be allowed to become a judge in his own cause."

15. The decision in Yeshwant Singh (supra) was approved

by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ITC Limited v. Adarsh

Cooperative Housing Society Limited 4.

16. In view of the aforesaid well settled legal position

which has been conceded to by the learned Government

Pleader for Revenue (Assignment), it is evident that even if

the petitioners are encroachers in respect of the land in

question, they cannot be dispossessed, except in

accordance with law.

17. Therefore, it is directed that no action for

dispossession of the petitioners in these writ petitions shall

be taken, except in accordance with law. Needless to state