HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION No.18161 OF 2016 DATE OF ORDER : 09.02.2026 Between:

Lakavat Devaji, (Died) S/o. Rajya Aged 47 years, Occ: Teacher in ZPHS, R/o.Hostel Tanda, Jannaram Town, Jannaram Mandal, Adilabad District Per L.Rs., petitioner Nos.2 to 5 .. Petitioners And The State of Telangana, through its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

“… to issue a writ or order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the fourth respondent in insisting upon the petitioner to provide passage through part of his land admeasuring 2 aces 2 guntas in Survey No.52 of Hostel Tanda of Jannaram Town of Jannaram Mandal in Adilabad District for creating thorough fare/access to the land of the fifth respondent in survey No.64 and 65, as being illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, and be pleased to pass such other order/s as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Heard Mr. Arpith Joy Ramesh, learned counsel representing Mr. Vivek Jain, learned counsel for petitioners, and Ms. Dara Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 4. In spite of service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.5.

3. Petitioner No.1 died during the pendency of the writ petition and petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are brought on record as legal representatives of petitioner No.1 (Lakavati Devaji).

4. Case of petitioners is that petitioner No.1 is the owner of land admeasuring Acs.2.02 guntas in Survey No.52 of Hostel Tanda, Jannaram Town in Adilabad District. Respondent No.5 owns land in Survey Nos.64 and 65 in the same village (adjacent to the land of petitioner No.1 on the western side) and that the land of petitioner No.1 is separated from the land of respondent No.5 by lands of Shameela and Devaji. The claim of petitioners is that respondent No.5 is causing troubles and creating nuisance by making representations to the revenue authorities and insisting to provide a thoroughfare to be carved out of his land. That on many occasions, respondent No.5 caused damage to the standing crops of petitioner No.1 by unauthorisedly plying his bullock cart through the land of petitioner No.1. 5. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that basing on representation dated 14.03.2016 of respondent No.5 to the Tahsildar, Jannaram Revenue Mandal - respondent No.4, a notice dated 26.04.2016 (Ex.P1 at page No.11) was issued by the Tahsildar to petitioners. Inviting the attention of this Court to the notice issued by the Tahsildar, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that revenue authorities cannot interfere with the possession of the petitioners’ land or conduct an enquiry on the issue of permitting respondent No.5 to reach his land, which would, in other words, create a right of way or right of path in favour of respondent No.5 over the petitioners’ private property. That the authorities cannot insist on conducting an enquiry pursuant to the said notice. It is pointed out that a date was also fixed for enquiry. It is pointed out that if respondent No.5 does not have access to his land, he may seek declaration of easementary rights by approaching the competent Civil Court, but cannot insist the petitioners to appear for enquiry for the said purpose. Learned counsel further invited the attention of this Court to the representation dated 24.03.2016 (Ex.P2 at page No.13) in the office of the District Collector by petitioner No.1 seeking indulgence of the Collector to consider the grievance of the petitioners.

6. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and considered the submissions.

7. Grievance of petitioners is that respondent No.5 is interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the agricultural land admeasuring Acs.2.02 guntas in S