2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 2537
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI
Banoth Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 2094/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI W.P.NO. 2094 OF 2026 DATED 23.01.2026 Between Banoth Ramesh and Another.
… Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and Nine others.
… Respondents
ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondents No.7 to 10 in restraining the devotees, including the petitioners from participating in the Sri Sri Tulja Bhavani Maha Jathara Celebrations scheduled to be held from 27.01.2026 to 02.02.2026 at Regalla Cross Roads, Laxmidevipalli Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere/restrain the petitioners and other devotees from participating in the Sri Sri Tulja Bhavani Maha Jathara Celebrations and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the celebrations for the deity have been held in the subject land in the past several years and that this year also arrangements have been made for the celebrations from the month of December, 2025. It is submitted that in view of obstructions from the authorities, the petitioners submitted a representation on 21.01.2026 to the respondent authorities for permission to hold the Jathara and apprehending that such permission might not be granted, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to various photographs filed along with the writ petition to demonstrate that the Jathara has been celebrated in the past also.
4. Learned Government Pleader for Forest obtained written instructions and submitted that the request of the petitioners has already been rejected vide proceedings dated 22.01.2026. It is stated that the place where the petitioners intend to celebrate the Jathara is inside the Reserve Forest area and therefore, the Forest Department cannot permit the petitioners to celebrate in the subject area. It is further submitted that in the pamphlet/flexi prepared by the petitioners, it is stated that the celebrations are going to be held for the first time in Telangana and therefore, according to him, the alleged celebrations were never held earlier and the petitioners with an evil intention of grabbing the precious land of the forest, have made this proposal of celebrating Jathara and after considering the relevant material, including the revenue records, the request of the petitioners has been rejected. A copy of the order dated 22.01.2026 has also been filed before this Court.
5. Learned Government Pleader for Home is also present and submitted that the police have received a complaint from the Forest Department on 22.01.2026 and that they will take action in accordance with law on the said complaint. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at this juncture, submitted that the petitioners are willing to give an undertaking to vacate the premises as soon as the Jathara is completed and therefore, the respondents may be directed to permit the petitioners to conduct the Jathara in the subject land.
7. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court, at this admission stage, finds that the petitioners have made a representation only on 21.01.2026, though they claim to have been making arrangements from the month of December, 2025. Further, as rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader for Forest, the pamphlet/flexi also mentions that it is going to be celebrated for the first time in the State of Telangana and the learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to demonstrate with any substantial evidence that the Jathara was conducted in the subject forest area in the earlier years. This Court is therefore of the opinion that the Jathara cannot be held by the petitioners at the subject site