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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 32675

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
B. Vijaysen Reddy, J
Ch. Rajendra Prasad – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.38695 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:
For the Respondents: Srinivas Rao Pachwa

Administrative authorities must ensure proper land demarcation and ownership verification, and provide notice and a hearing to affected parties, before proceeding with construction on disputed land.

Headnote:The petitioners sought a Writ of Mandamus to challenge the inaction of the respondent authority regarding a representation dated 22.11.2025 and to prevent the construction of a compound wall on a specific plot of land. The respondent authority had initiated construction for a graveyard, which was subsequently halted due to objections and disputes raised by members of another graveyard community. The primary issue involves the determination of land ownership and the proper demarcation of boundaries between two graveyards. The respondent authority submitted that a report from the Town Planning Wing is awaited to clarify whether the land is government or private and to establish accurate boundaries before proceeding with the construction. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to undertake any work without putting the petitioners on notice, affording them an opportunity of hearing, and furnishing a copy of the Town Planning Wing report.

Table of Content
1. necessity of verifying land ownership and boundary demarcation in disputed land construction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. requirement of due process, notice, and hearing before executing administrative works on disputed land. (Para 4)

ORDER

The writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondent No.3 in considering the representation of the petitioners dated 22.11.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and direct the respondent No.3 not to make any construction of compound wall around the plot of land admeasuring 1256 sq. yards out of 3500 sq. yards, Sy.No.6/14 Part (Old), 9 (New), Rock Hills Colony, Mansurabad Villag, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, under the guise of work order No.25001406/EE, Hayathnagar DB/GHMC/2025-26 dated 14.11.2025.

2. Mr. Srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned standing counsel for the respondent - GHMC, based on written instructions, submitted that on the representation submitted by the Mohammadia Masjid Khabrastan Committee, GHMC has taken up the work of construction of a compound wall and filling the gravel at Mohammadia Masjid Khabrastan, located beside Rajiv Gandhi Nagar in Ward No.11, Nagole. The Zonal Commissioner, L.B. Nagar Zone, accorded administrative sanction on 04.11.2025 for execution of the said work, for an estimated amount of Rs.11 Lakhs and the work was entrusted to a contractor. Mark-out of the site was given to the executing agency for commencement of work. During the process of levelling the ground, the work was obstructed and stopped by the members of the Hindu Graveyard. In view of the dispute, the work was stopped. Meanwhile, the petitioners approached this Court objecting the proposed construction of compound wall between the Muslim and Hindu graveyards.

3. Learned standing counsel further submitted that in view of the objections raised and in order to avoid any dispute and possible law and order issues, a letter was addressed to the Town Planning Wing and the ACP, Hayathnagar, Circle-3, seeking clarification regarding the land ownership details, as to whether the subject land is Government land or private land and also requested proper demarcation of the boundaries of the Hindu and Muslim graveyards at Mohammadia Masjid Khabrastan. The land status and boundary demarcation report is still awaited from the Town Planning Wing. He submitted that upon receipt of the report, the demarcation of Muslim and Hindu graveyards will be done and boundary will be fixed and thereafter, compound wall construction will be taken up by following due process of law.

4. As it is stated that the construction of compound wall has been stopped and the report of the Town Planning Wing is awaited, recording the same, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents No.3 and 4 not to undertake any work without putting the petitioners on notice, by affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and by furnishing copy of the Town Planning Wing.

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

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