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) 57277

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
Chintala Venkata Kishore – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 9801/2025



HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9801 of 2025

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 the nature of writ of Mandamus:

a) by declaring the action of Respondents in interfering with proposed house construction in spite there being a valid house permission vide permit No.0091/BP/3121/2023, dated 25.07.2023 in the petitioner’s house plot to an extent of 617 square yards in Sy.No.343/10 situated at Ameenpur Village and Mandal, Sangareddy District, showing the status-quo order dated 02.02.2023 in W.P.No.2847 of 2023 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 300A of Constitution of India: and b) consequently direct the official respondents not to interfere with the proposed house construction or pass such other order or orders as this Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case...”

2. The case of the petitioners is that they are the owners and possessors of the open land admeasuring 617 square yards in Sy.No.343/10 situated at Ameenpur Village and Mandal, Sangareddy District, within the limits of Ameenpur Municipality, having purchased the same under the registered sale deed bearing Document No.40357 of 2021, dated 30.09.2021. It is further stated that the vendor of the petitioners and their predecessors have purchased the subject property under the registered sale deeds. It is also stated that after purchasing the subject property, the petitioners have obtained necessary building permission for construction of residential building vide permit No.0091/BP/3121/2023, dated

25.07.2023.

3. It is the further case of the petitioners that while they were proceeding with the construction work, respondent Nos.3 and 4 started interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject property and also the construction work. On questioning, the respondents informed them that there is a Status-quo order dated 02.02.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.2847 of 2023, which was filed by the vendor of the petitioners regarding boundary disputes between the vendor of the petitioners and TSPF land in Sy.No.343/10.

4. The grievance of the petitioners is that although they are not parties to W.P.No.2847 of 2023 and the vendor of the petitioners is now no way concerned with the subject property, the official respondents are frequently interfering with the construction work.

Therefore, they were constrained to file the present Writ Petition.

5. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Mr.Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5 and perused the record.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the petitioners have purchased the subject property under registered sale deed bearing document No.40357 of 2021, dated 30.09.2021 and that their vendor and their predecessors have purchased the subject property under the registered sale deeds. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners have obtained building permission for construction of residential building vide permit No.0091/BP/3121/2023, dated 25.07.2023 and proceeding with the construction work.

7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submits that there is a dispute with regard to the identification and localisation of land forming part of Sy.No.343/10 and the same is abutting to the Government land. It is also submitted that the subject land was assigned to the vendor’s vendor of the petitioners as such their vendors are not entitled for alienation or transfer of the land in favour of the petitioners as such the petitioners are not having any valid document or right to proceed with the constructions.

8. Since it is the case of the petitioners that the respondents wit

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