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) 40536

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
Mrs. Shahnaz Begum – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 31570/2025



THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.31570 of 2025

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not granting financial assistance and ex gratia relief to the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently, to direct the respondents to release the financial assistance, compensation, and ex gratia amount based on the inspection report submitted by the 6th respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners appearing online and Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 1st petitioner is the widow of late Mohammad Abdul Raheem; petitioners 2 to 5 are her children; and petitioners 6 to 8 are the vendees who purchased certain portions of the land lawfully from the 1st petitioner and her children.

He submits that the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of land measuring Ac.17.34 gts in Sy.No.722, Ac.11.07 gts in Sy.No.723, and Ac.17.12 gts in Sy.No.724, situated at Bhongir Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District, totaling Ac.46.25 gts. Out of this, an extent of Ac.5.00 gts has been sold to petitioners 6 to 8.

4. He further submits that due to severe rains and windstorms on the night of 02.05.2025, the crops and cattle sheds on the said land were badly affected. Accordingly, the petitioners made a representation on 03.05.2025 to the Revenue Department seeking compensation under the Natural Calamity Relief Fund (NCRF)/State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF). Pursuant to the same, the Revenue Inspector inspected the site and conducted a panchanama in the presence of the petitioners and their workers.

5. In response to the petitioners’ representation, the 5th respondent issued a reply dated 25.07.2025, which was received by the petitioners on 05.09.2025, stating as follows:

“It is further submitted that with respect to the lands in Survey Nos.722, 723, and 724 of Bhongir village outskirts, there exists a dispute between the applicant and the Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Plot Owners’ Association and others. In view of the status quo orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad in W.P.No.28583/2021, it is not possible to sanction financial assistance from the Government. The same is hereby informed for your kind information.”

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the status quo order passed by this Court pertains solely to a civil dispute and has no bearing on the petitioners' claims for relief under the NCRF or SDRF. He also submits that neighboring landowners have been extended financial assistance; however, the petitioners have not been granted any compensation. As such, he seeks the indulgence of this Court to pass appropriate orders.

7. On the other hand, Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, upon instructions, submits that as per the revised list of items and norms of assistance under the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF)

and the National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF), communicated through Letter No.33-02/2020-NDM-I dated 11.07.2023 from the Ministry of Home Affairs (Disaster Management Division), Government of India, financial assistance under Item No.10 is admissible only for houses and cattle sheds that are attached to houses, and such constructions must be authorized. He submits that the petitioners' request pertains only to a cattle shed, which is not attached to a residential house. Hence, their request was not considered eligible for financial assistance under the NDRF/SDRF. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

8. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, and upon examining the material placed before this Court, since the request of the petitioners for financial assistance has been rejected and the disputes between the petitioners h

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