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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 43919

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
GUNDEBOINA VENKATESHWARLU – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF TELANGANA – Respondent
WP 20225/2020



THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.20225 of 2020

ORDER :

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

“….to issue an appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in not taking the action against the Respondent Nos.3 to 5 who demolished my compound wall without any notice and fenced the land and taken into their possession is illegal arbitrary and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and pass.…”

2. Heard Sri T.Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Rakesh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and perused the record.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is the absolute owner and possessor of land to an extent of Acs.0.06 guntas in Sy.No.887, situated at Dondapadu village and Gram Panchayat, Chinthalapalem Mandal, Suryapet District. The petitioner purchased the subject property from Sri Vishnudaasyam Jaganmohan Rao in the year 2001 and since then, the petitioner is in enjoyment of the subject property. Later on, petitioner constructed compound wall with limestone around the subject property and he is eking out his livelihood by nurturing buffalos, goats, sheeps.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that on 08.09.2020, respondent Nos.3 to 5 visited the land of the petitioner and demolished the compound wall with the help of JCB, without issuing any notice and also tried to flatter the complete land with the help of JCB. When the petitioner questioned the same, respondent Nos.3 to 5 threatened him with dire consequences. Aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner made a representation dated 10.09.2020 to respondent No.2. Despite receiving the said representation, respondent No.2 did not act upon the same. Hence, the present writ petition. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, would submit that the representation made by the petitioner is under consideration. Respondent No.2 will consider the same and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law.

6. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 10.09.2020 and pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, by putting the petitioner on notice and affording him an opportunity. If respondent No.2 is not inclined to accept the request made by the petitioner, he shall pass a reasoned order, communicate copy of the said order to the petitioner and complete the said exercise within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no orders as to costs.

As a sequel, thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.

____________________ E.V.VENUGOPAL, J Dated: 11.09.2025 VSU

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top