High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 10 TEL CK 1716

Eslavath Sunitha vs The State Of Telangana & Ors.

Telangana High Court, Hyderabad · Decided on 6 October 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. Lakshman, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 29977 of 2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 254 words

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

2.

Petitioner is claiming that she is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.2.00 guntas in Sy.Nos.71/lu/2/1/2/1/1/1/1/1/1/2/1 and 71/lu/2/1/2/1/1/1/1/1/1/2/2, situated at Makhal Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. In proof of the same, she has filed the copies of the latest pattadar passbook and title deed. She has been in possession of the subject property. Even then respondent No.4 is trying to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the subject property and also trying to dispossess her without following the due procedure laid down under law. Respondent No.4 came to the subject property on 03.08.2025 and erected a board stating that the subject property belongs to the Government. Aggrieved by the said action of respondent No.4, petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, would submit that the subject property is ceiling land. However, respondent No.4 will follow the due procedure laid down under law before taking any action against the petitioner herein.

4.

In the latest pattadar passbook and title deed, the subject property is mentioned as patta land. Therefore, respondent No.4 has to consider the said aspects.

5.

In the light of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.4 not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without following the due procedure laid down under law.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.