P.Anil Reddy vs The State Of Telangana,
2025 Latest Caselaw 1608 Tel

Telangana High Court

P.Anil Reddy vs The State Of Telangana, on 31 January, 2025

     THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL

                                AND

              THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

                   WRIT APPEAL No.123 of 2025

JUDGMENT (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul)

Sri V. Venumadhav, learned counsel for the appellant and

Sri Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned Government Pleader for

Revenue, for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. Heard on admission.

3. This Intra-Court appeal takes exception to the interim

order dated 09.01.2025 in W.P.No.22904 of 2024. The said Writ

Petition is still pending.

4. The bone of contention of learned counsel for the appellant

is that the predecessor in title of the appellant filed W.P.No.24964

of 2012, which came to be decided on 02.08.2022. The impugned

order therein was set aside. The appellant is occupying the same

land and when he was threatened by respondent No.3 for

demolishing the construction over the said land, he filed the instant

writ petition. Initially, learned Single Judge on 21.08.2024 granted

an ad interim protection to the appellant which was subsequently

modified. Even if the said interim protection was not expressly

extended, it shall be deemed to be extended in view of the Circular

issued by the High Court. Since such interim protection was in

vogue, the demolition by the official respondents during the

subsistence of such interim order is contemptuous in nature and

runs contrary to the judgment of the Apex Court. It is submitted

that in clear breach of the interim order of learned Single Judge,

the demolition had taken place which is bad in law.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at length.

6. The impugned interim order shows that the matter was

directed to be listed on 13.02.2025 by learned Single Judge and

parties were directed to maintain status quo. Even assuming that

the demolition had taken place, contrary to the interim order, the

impact of the same needs to be assessed by the learned Single

Judge. It is in the province of the learned Single Judge to decide

whether the demolition had taken place while interim order was

subsisting. If yes, necessary and consequential relief may be

granted while deciding the writ petition. At this stage, no relief is

due to the appellant in this writ appeal.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of by reserving

liberty to the appellant to apprise the learned Single Judge about

the nature of illegality in demolishing the construction of the

appellant. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any

opinion on the merits of the case. No costs.

Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand

closed.

___________________ SUJOY PAUL, ACJ

____________________ RENUKA YARA, J

Date: 31.01.2025 Myk/Tsr