SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 2223

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J.
Mr. Dosapati Srinivas and others – Petitioner
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation & Command Area Development Department & others – Respondents
Writ Petition Nos. 15154 of 2013 & 19648 and 21334 of 2014 
Decided On : 02-12-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : S Surender Reddy
For the Respondent: GP For Irrigation & Comm Area Dev

Eviction of occupants from government quarters requires adherence to due process and respect for constitutional rights, as per Articles 14 and 21.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 21 - Writ of Mandamus seeking declaration of eviction actions as illegal and arbitrary - Petitioners sought to retain possession of government quarters after tenure as public representatives - Allotted quarters were in dilapidated condition and were not officially rented - No due process followed in eviction efforts by respondents. (Paras 1, 26)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Court emphasized the need for due process in eviction and adherence to natural justice principles in housing matters. (Paras 26, 27)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners were allotted quarters during their official tenure but were threatened with eviction without due process after their tenure ended. They claimed no dues were pending and argued that eviction would violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. (Paras 6, 15, 18)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the respondents failed to follow due process for eviction and emphasized the necessity of proper evaluation of the quarters’ conditions before any eviction. (Paras 24, 26)

Issues: The legality of the eviction of petitioners from quarters and the necessity of following due process given the alleged dilapidated condition of the quarters by the respondents. (Paras 25, 27)

Ratio Decidendi: The court decreed that eviction requires adherence to due process and cannot occur without determination of property condition and outstanding obligations of occupants, reinforcing the principle of natural justice. (Paras 27, 28)

Result: Writ Petitions disposed with directives for proper evaluation and decision-making within six months.

Table of Content
1. implications of unpaid rent and eviction rights (Para 2 , 6 , 12 , 13)
2. facts regarding petitioners' housing situation (Para 4 , 5 , 8)
3. petitioners' arguments about eviction and due process (Para 7 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. court analysis on eviction processes (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
5. details regarding division bench orders and implications (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
6. conclusion on decision-making process by authorities (Para 24 , 26 , 27 , 28)

ORDER :

ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J.

Writ Petition No.15154 of 2013 is filed seeking the following prayer:

“…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in locking the Petitioners Quarter Nos.AE/5, A/11, A/16, A/14, A/20 and A/22 respectively situated at Nagarjuna Sagar Canal Camp Colony, Miryalaguda Nalgonda District by mentioning the W.P.No.20756 of 2011 without any order of the Hon’ble High Court by preventing the petitioners from taking out his belongings i.e., entire household vessels, clothes, children’s books, petty cash and ATM Cards, is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and violative of Articles 14 And 21 of the constitution of India, null and void and consequently direct the respondents to open the lock and continue the petitioners in their respective Quarter Nos.AE/5, A/11, A/16, A/14, A/20 and A/22 respectively situated at Nagarjuna Sagar Canal Camp Colony, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District, till the policy decisions is taken by respondents 1 and 2 and pass such other order or orders...”

Writ Petition No.19648 of 2014 is filed seeking the following prayer:

“…to issue a direction, order or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring action of the respondents No.4 to 6 in trying to dispossess/evict the petitioners from their respective quarters bearing Q.NO.C/16 C/195 C/156, C/105, H/R-6, C/196/2, C/142/1 and AEQC/1 of NSP Camp Colony Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District, with the help of Revenue and police persons is nothing but illegal, arbitrary, abuse of process of law, violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to rules and consequently to direct the respondents not to dispossess/evict the petitioners from their respective quarters bearing Q.NO.C/16, C/195, C/156, C/105, H/R-6 C/196/2, C/142/1 and AEQC/1 of NSP Camp Colony, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District, with the help of Revenue and police persons by taking coercive steps and pass such other order or orders...”

Writ Petition No.21334 of 2014 is filed seeking the following prayer:

“…to issue a direction, order or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring action of the respondents No.4 to 6 in trying to dispossess/evict the petitioner from his quarters bearing Q.NO.C/118 of NSP Camp Colony, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District, with the help of Revenue and police persons is nothing but illegal, arbitrary, abuse of process of law, violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to rules and consequently to direct the respondents not to dispossess/evict the petitioner from his respective quarters bearing Q.NO.C/118, of NSP Camp Colony, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District, with the help of Revenue and police persons by taking coercive steps and pass and pass such other order or orders...”

2. Heard Mr. S.Surendar Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and Command Area Development appearing for respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.2 and Mrs.Balla Savitri, learned counsel for Implead Petitioner i.e., respondent No.6.

3. Issue in all writ petitions is similar in nature. Hence, they are taken up together for disposal.

4. For reference, facts in W.P.No.15154 of 2013 are being considered.

5. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that houses were constructed for employees, engaged in the construction of Irrigation Project and Canals of Na

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top