I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.12015 OF 2003 Between:

Motilal (died per LRs) T.Pruthviraj & others … Petitioners And The District Collector R.R. District At Hyderabad and others … Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 09.06.2025 THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes may be allowed to see the Judgment?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be : Yes marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to : Yes.

see the fair copy of the Judgment?

________________________________

MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.12015 OF 2003 % 09.06.2025 Between:

# Motilal (died per LRs)

T.Pruthviraj & others … Petitioners And $ The District Collector R.R. District At Hyderabad and others … Respondents Gist:

> Head Note:

! Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri Varun Thakur ^ Counsel for Respondents : Sri A.Sudharshan Reddy, Ld.Advocate General for R1 and R2 Sri L.Prabhakar Reddy, for R3 ? Cases Referred:

i) The earlier orders of this Court, dated 10.09.2014 passed in W.P.No.1883 of 2003, ii) The order of this Court, dated 04.11.2004 passed in W.P.No.16934 of 2002, iii) The order of this Court, dated 25.04.2003 passed in W.P.No.21712 of 2002.

iv) The orders of the Division Bench judgment of this Court, dated 13.02.2024 passed in W.P.Nos.8293, 10107, 10598, 14061, 23945, 24608, 27505 of 2005, 33376, 38695 of

2013, 22798, 22803, 23787, 24373, 24390, 24400, 24408 of 2015 and 8291 of v) 2016 vol 6 SCC page 150 vi) AIR 1989 SC 682 vii) 1992(1) SCC 114 viii) 1982 SCC Online AP 241.

ix) (2012 (1) SCC 792 x) 2016 (14) SCC page 746 xi) 2022 Live-Law(SC) 888 xii) 2012 Vol 9 SCC 503 xiii) 2011 vol 5 SCC 553 xiv) AIR 1989 Supreme Court 682 xv) 2008 vol 9 SCC 552 xvi) (2023) Livelaw (SC) 302 xvii) 2023) Livelaw (SC) 632 xviii) 2024 SCC OnLine SC 932 xix) (2011) 10 SCC 404 xx) 2013 (1) SCC 353 xxi) 2024 SCC online SC 968 HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.12015 OF 2003

ORDER:

Heard Sri Varun Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Sri A.Sudharshan Reddy, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Sri L.Prabhakar Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3

2. The petitioners approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“...to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ and declare that the action of the respondents in acquiring the lands of the petitioner in survey Nos. 111/1 and 111 totally admeasuring Ac. 13-30 guntas in Nanakramguda Village Serilingampally mandal Ranga Reddy District for the purpose of establishment of Information and Technology park by the 3rd respondent is arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondent to forbear from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner over the said lands and grant such other...”

3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, as per the averments made by the petitioners in the affidavit by the petitioners in support of the present writ petition, is as under:

The present Writ Petition was filed on 23.06.2003, initially by one Motilal s/ o Tuljaram who had passed away on 12.11.2007 and the petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 had been brought on record as LRs of deceased sole petitioner as per court order, dated 04.04.2012 passed in W.P.M.P.No.11798 of 2012.

The petitioners’ late father i.e., one Mr. Motilal s/ o Tuljaram is the absolute owner and possessor of an agriculture land admeasuring Acres 13.30 guntas in Sy.No.111/ 1 and 111 of Nanakramguda Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Rangareddy District and the petitioners’ late father had been cultivating the said lands with the assistance of monsoon rains, a bore well and a natural well. I n the year 2002 paddy crop had been raised in the said subject lands, but in the year 2003 due to poor monsoon, the said land had been kept fallow.

I t is further the case of the petitioners that the 1st resp