I N THE HI GH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE B. VI JAYSEN REDDY W RI T PETI TI ON No.36744 of 2025 Dated: 01.12.2025 Betw een Moola Vinutha …PETI TI ONER And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (MA & UD) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

…RESPONDENTS

ORDER

The writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent No.3 in not serving any notice to the petitioner and without following the due process of Land Acquisition Act, 2013, in trying to interfere in the possession and demolish the properties of petitioner bearing H.No.19-7-33 situated in Laxminagar, Godavarikhani under Ramagundam Municipal Corporation area, Peddapalli District, as arbitrary, unreasonable, ultra vires, violative of provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, besides violation of Articles 14, 21 and

300A of the Constitution of India.

2. Mr. K. Siddhartha Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent No.3 – Ramagundam Municipal Corporation, submitted, on the basis of written instructions, submitted that the Master Plan for Ramagundam Municipal Corporation has been approved vide G.O.Ms.No.199 dated 11.05.2001, the road leading from Rahul Hospital to Reegal Shoe Mart (Via Sampath Mobiles) up to VK Reddy tea stall is earmarked as 40’-00” in the master plan. The respondent corporation is developing the roads within the Municipal Corporation limits as per Master Plan. The subject property is abutting 40’-00” wide master plan road and it was found that the subject property of the petitioner is encroaching into the Master Plan road by about 5’-00”, which is affecting the master plan road width.

3. The petitioner is claiming possession over the subject property for the past more than 50 years. The petitioner was granted building construction permit vide B/3347/1985 dated 29.04.1986 by the then Ramagundam Notified Area and house was constructed by the petitioner and her family members and are residing for the past for several years. As there was interference by the respondents without following due process of law, the writ petition is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that structures are raised in the subject property and there is no dispute with regard to building permit granted to the petitioner on 29.04.1986.

5. Considering the claim made by the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.3 not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner bearing H.No.19-7-33 situated in Laxminagar, Godavarikhani under Ramagundam Municipal Corporation area, Peddapalli District, without following due process of law. This order shall not come in the way of the respondent No.3 in taking action against the petitioner if any of the existing road margin is encroached.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

____________________ B. VI JAYSEN REDDY, J December 1, 2025 Note: Issue CC today (B/ o) DSK