Telangana High Court
Mohd. Ateeq Ahmed vs The Government Of Telangana, Rep. By Its ... on 20 June, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY,
TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN
:PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO:14333 of 2015
Between:
Mohd. Ateeq Ahmed S/o. Mohd. Saleem
..... Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Telangana, (Department of General Administration),
Secretariat, Hyderabad, Rep. by the Chief Secretary, Government of
Telananga.
2. The District Collector, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad Division, Hyderabad.
4. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Sheikpet Village and Mandal,
Hyderabad
5. Union of India, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi, Rep. by Defence
Estate Officer, Secunderabad.
.....Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein, the High Court may be
pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly
one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the
Respondents of surveying the land in question in Survey No. 246 to
253, 263 to 268 and 272 to 273 admeasuring 47 acres 21 guntas
situated in Shiakpet village, Sahikpet Mandal, Hyderabad and desist
from changing the nature of the land to a Parade Ground, without
following the procedure of law and without notifying the petitioner
about the purported action for change of land use and further protect
the Right to Property under Art. 300A r/w Art. 14 of the Constitution of
India by restraining the Respondents 1 to 5 from interfering with the
petitioner properties which is in petitioner peaceful possession with
all his rights intact.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the
petition and the affidavit filed herein and upon hearing
the arguments of Sri C. Sudesh Anand, Advocate for the
Petitioner, and the Govt. Pleader for GAD (TG) for the
Respondent No. 1, and the Govt. Pleader for Revenue
(TG) for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4, and Sri B.
Narayana Reddy, Asst. Solicitor General for the
Respondent No.5, the Court made the following
ORDER:
"Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
Sri C. Sudesh Anand, learned counsel for the
petitioner, submits that a civil suit in O.S.No.6042 of 2000
was filed for injunction and the same was decreed
against which an appeal was filed and the same was
dismissed upholding the judgment of the trial judge in
O.S.No.6042 of 2000 and as on today no second appeal
is filed. He further submits that the respondents are
trying to survey the lands in question and produced
several orders.
(Contd. 2. )
.2.
This writ petition has been filed basing on the
newspaper reports that survey will be conducted by the
respondents in respect of the lands in question against
which the petitioner obtained a decree, which is in
violation of Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for
Revenue states that the land grabbing case filed by the
petitioner against the Government was dismissed, and in
the writ petition being W.P.No.11149 of 2001 filed by the
petitioner it was held that the petitioner has to approach
the civil court seeking declaratory decree in his favour.
He also submits that basing on the newspaper reports
the present writ petition cannot be maintained and he
seeks time for getting instructions in the matter.
Sri B. Narayana Reddy, learned Assistant Solicitor
General, appearing for the 5th respondent submits that
against the decree in A.S.No.284 of 2009 a second
appeal was filed and the same is in SR stage.
Since the entire cause of action mentioned in the writ
petition is based on the newspaper reports that the
respondents will conduct survey, it has to be ascertained
whether any survey is being undertaken or not.
However, it is not stated that there is immediate threat of
dispossession.
Learned Government Pleader also says that a
general survey is being conducted in respect of all the
lands and seeks time for getting instructions.
In view of the same, post on 04.06.2015 in the motion
list."
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To
1. The Chief Secretary, (Department of General Administration), State
of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. The District Collector, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad Division, Hyderabad.
4. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Sheikpet Village and Mandal,
Hyderabad
5. The Defence Estate Officer, Union of India, Ministry of Defence, New
Delhi, Secunderabad.
6. Two CCs to the Govt. Pleader for GAD, (TG) High Court at
Hyderabad. (OUT)
7. Two CCs to the Govt. Pleader for Revenue (TG) High Court at
Hyderabad. (OUT)
8. Two CCs to Sri B. Narayana Reddy, Asst. Solicitor General,
High Court at Hyderabad. (OUT)
9. One CC to Sri C.Sudesh Anand, Advocate(OPUC)
10. One spare copy.
BV
HIGH COURT
ARR.J
DATED: 07-05-2015
NOTE:
POST on 04-06-2015
IN THE MOTION LIST
ORDER
W.P. NO.14333 OF 2015
DIRECTION
DRAFTED: BY BV
DATED : 08-05-2015
HIGH COURT
ARR.J
DATED: 07-05-2015
NOTE:
POST on 04-06-2015
IN THE MOTION LIST
ORDER
W.P. NO.14333 OF 2015
DIRECTION
