THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY ORDER : (ORAL)

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking the following relief:

“... to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in not considering my representation dtd. 13-10-2025 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and Abusing the Process of Law & Jurisdiction and Principles of Rules against Bias by the Respondents pertaining to the land 150 Acres in Survey No.124/1/Lu at Gopanpally, Serlingampally Mandal, RR District and consequently release 3 Acr land (only) to the Petitioners herein as this is purely a private land after the sale deed got executed vide 690/1964 and hand over the possession to the rightful legal heirs i.e., the Petitioners herein and pass ...”

2. Heard Mr. M. Sridhar Dayal, learned counsel, representing Mr. M. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. K. Pavan Kumar, learned standing counsel for the HYDRAA, appearing for respondent No.2, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, for respondent No.3, and Mr. G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned standing counsel for the GHMC, appearing for respondent No.4.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that mother-in- law of petitioner No.1, late Mrs. M. Padmavathi purchased the land admeasuring Acs.3-00 guntas in Survey No.124/1 Loo situated at Gopanpalli Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, under registered sale deed bearing document No.690 of 1964 dated 04.12.1964. After death of her mother-in-law, petitioner No.1 succeeded to the subject land. The land of petitioner No.1 was illegally grabbed by habitual property offenders and land grabbers namely i.e., Mr. Gokaraju Subbaraju S/o. Gokaraju Ramaraju, Mr. G. Ganesh Kumar, Mr. K. Somavathy, Mr. Appala Charyulu Chilakanarri, Mr. Yogananda Venkata Somayajulu, Mr. Nuthi Subrah and others.

4. It is submitted that the land grabbers have fabricated and created fictitious documents and grabbed the Government land of worth Rs.15,000/- crores. In that connection, the petitioners lodged complaint against the above persons in Crime No.1068 of 2021 of Gachibowli Police Station for the offences of cheating, forgery, criminal trespass, land grabbing etc.

5. It is submitted that the land grabbers have not only committed fraud on the Government but also on the private persons. They have fraudulently obtained loans from the Banks and financial institutions and they are liable to be prosecuted under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. Accordingly, the petitioners submitted representation dated 13.10.2025 requesting respondent Nos.2 and 4 to take action against the land grabbers who have occupied valuable Government land admeasuring Acs.150-00 guntas in Survey No.124/1/Lu of Gopanpally Village.

6. Learned standing counsel for the HYDRAA and learned standing counsel for the GHMC submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable. The petitioners have made vague allegations against third parties who are not impleaded in the writ petition. The claim of the petitioners is only for an extent of Acs.03-00 guntas. However, allegations are made against third parties that they have grabbed Acs.150-00 guntas of Government land in Survey No.124/1/Lu of Gopanpally Village. The writ petition cannot be filed for deciding title disputes. If the petitioners have ownership over the land admeasuring Acs.3-00 guntas, they have to prove their title and possession before the competent Court of law.

7. The claim of the petitioners is only Acs.3-00 guntas. Thus, it is unacceptable as to how the petitioners are seeking for relief for Acs.150-00 guntas of land. Be that as if may, the petitioners have not chosen to make companies or persons who allegedly grabbed the Government land as respondents to this writ petition. In the opinion of this Court, mere submitting representation does not give rise to cause of action and approach this Court seek