Telangana High Court
Chethireddy Linga Reddy vs The State Of Telangana Rep By Its ... on 28 April, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.39851 of 2015
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.H.Rakesh Kumar,
learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent
Nos.1 to 4. With their consent, this writ petition is taken up for disposal.
2. This writ petition is filed seeking following prayer:
"to declare the action of the respondents in issuing Proceedings
No.F/6606/2015 dated 22.09.2015 as arbitrary, illegal, without
jurisdiction and violation of Article 14, 19 and 300-A of the
Constitution of India and violative of Principles of Natural Justice
consequently direct the respondent not to interfere with the
possession of the petitioner in respect of Survey No.356 admeasuring
Ac.-5-18 guntas of each of the petitioners No.1 to 4 and Ac.5-18
guntas of Petitioner No.5 and 6 of Pregnapur Village, Gazwel
Mandal, Medak District."
3. Brief facts in this writ petition are that the petitioners claims that their
great grand father Sri.Narsaiah has succeeded land admeasuring Ac.30.00, in
Sy.No.356, Pregnapur Village, Gazwel Mandal, Medak District. Thereafter, the
petitioners' father have succeeded his share and after his death, petitioners
through partition got their share to an extent of land admeasuring Ac.5-18 gts
each and thereafter, the petitioners were in peaceful possession of the subject
property. Further case is that the respondent No.3 issued impugned notices
bearing Proc.No.F/6606/2015 dated 22.09.2015, wherein it is stated that the
respondent No.4 in the report dated 31.08.2015, informed that the Collector
(S&LRs), Medak District at Sangareddy vide file bearing No.C3/995/1989
dated 13.12.1997, informed that the land in Sy.No.356, situated at Pregnapur
village is Government land. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this writ petition is
squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.31767 of 2015
and W.P.No.33224 of 2015, wherein this Court had allowed the writ petitions
by setting aside the proceedings No.F/6606/2015 dated 22.09.2015, relevant
portion of the orders are extracted hereunder:-
Order dated 05.03.2020 passed in W.P.No.31767 of 2015:
"Both the counsel state that the lis in the writ petition is squarely
covered by the judgment of Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District v.
D.Narsing Rao ( (2015) 3 Supreme Court Cases 695).
In view of the above submissions, the impugned order is set
aside.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated
above. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications
pending, if any, shall stand closed."
Order dated 18.03.2021 in W.P.No.33224 of 2015:
"Moreover, this Court, while dealing with similar issue in W.P. Nos.
24716 of 2003 and batch, wherein the Joint Collector had, after lapse of
48 years, exercised the suo motu powers under Section 9 of the A.P.
Rights in Land and pattadar pass Books Act, 1971, set aside the
impugned proceedings therein holding that the 1st respondent (Joint
Collector) cannot initiate proceedings under Section 9 of the Act after
long lapse of 48 years and unsettle the settle things, which became
final. Further, by order, dated 05.03.2020 this Court has already
allowed W.P.No.31767 of 2015, filed by certain individuals, which
emanated from the very same order, which is impugned in the present
writ petition. In that view of the matter and for the reasons recorded
above, the impugned proceedings, as against the petitioners herein, are
liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the
impugned orders to the extent of the petitioners herein.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No
order as to costs."
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners pray this Court to pass similar
orders as passed in W.P.No.31767 of 2015 dated 05.03.2020 and W.P.No.33224
of 2015 dated 18.03.2021.
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondents did
not dispute the same.
7. Recording the above submissions and in terms of the orders passed by
this Court in W.P.No.31767 of 2015 dated 05.03.2020 and W.P.No.33224 of 2015
dated 18.03.2021, this writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned
proceedings bearing No.F/6606/2015 dated 22.09.2015 and the respondent
authorities are directed not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners in
respect of the subject property without following due procedure as
contemplated under law.
8. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications,
if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
_________________________________
JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Date: 28.04.2025
SU
