R. Saidaiah v. The State of Telangana

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

Judgment date: 2026-04-13

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-13. R. Saidaiah v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.

Judgment text

I , , j I [ 3183 I I tN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA I I AT HYDERABAD I (Special Original Jurisdiction) i MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRt JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 11317 OF 2026 Between: 1. R. Saidaiah, s/9. Rataiah, Age. Ss years, occ. Business, R/o. shop No. 35, NTR shopping complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nargonda District. 2. K. shouri, S/o. Amrutham, Age. 60 years, occ. Business, R"/o. Shop No. 1g, NTR shopping complex, Miryaraguda Town, Nargonda District. 3. J. urmila, wo. J. surender Reddy, Age. 45 years, occ. Business, R"/o. shop No. 21, NTR shopping complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 4. cH. srinivas, s{o. Lingaiah, Age. 50 years, occ. Business, R/o. Shop No. 61, NTR shopping complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nargonda District. 5. v. saidulu, s/o Ramulu, Age. s2 years, occ. Business, R/o. shop No. 49, ^V. NTR Shopping complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nargonda District. 6. S. sukumar, s/o. s.

John Mark, Age. 50 years, occ. Business, Rio. shop ' No. 19, NTR Shopping complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 7. B. Padmavathi, wo. B. Anantha Ramuru, Age. 60 years, occ. Business, Rt/o. shop No. 22, NTR shopping comprex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 8. K. Anjaneyulu, s/o. K. Lingaiah, Age. 65 years, occ. Business, R/o. shop No. 42, NTR shopping complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 9. D. srinivas, s/o. G_uruvaiah, Age. 56 years, occ. Business, Rl/o. Q. shop No. 85, NTR shopping complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 10. 8. srinivas, s/o. Laxmaiah, Age. 54years, occ. Business, R/o. shop No. g4, NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 11. MD. sydoddin, s/o. MD. Anwar, Age. 60 years, occ. Business, R/o. Shop No. 40, NTR shopping complex, Miryalagudi Town, Nalgonda District. 12. cH. Madhan Mohan, s/o. Manikyam, Age. 45 years, occ. Business, Rio. shop No. 20, NTR shopping comprex, Miryalagudi Town, Nalgonda District. 13. M.

Veerabadraiah, s/o. M. pulraiah, Age. 4g years, occ. Business, R/o. shop No. 41, NTR shopping complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 14. G. Sadanandam, S/o. G. Kishan, Age. 56 years, Occ. Business' Rl/o. Shop No. 60, NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 15. M. Saida Naik (died), Per L. R. Malothu Janardhan S/o' M. Late Saida Naik, Age. 46 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. Shop No. 37, NTR Shopping Complex, Mirlralaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 16. P. Devaraju, S/o. Krishnaiah, Age. 48 years, Occ. Business, FUo. Shop No. 33, NTtl Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 17. 8. Someshwar Rao, S/o. Nageshwar Rao, Age. 54 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. Shop No. 71, NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 18. S. tlavi Kumar, S/o. Chenna Krishnaiah, Age. 52. years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. Shop No. 59, NTR Shopping Complex, Miryala()uila Town, Nalgonda District. 19. G. Sathyanarayana, S/o. Venkaiah, Age. 61 years, Occ. Business, Ri,/o.

Shop No. '/2, NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 20. K. Sathish Kumar, S/o. K. Vasudeava Rao, Age. 45 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Shop No. 6, NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda Dist'ict. 21. D. Nagender, S/o. D. Saidulu, Age. 49 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. Shop No. B0, NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. 22. T. F. amulu, S/o. Saidulu, Age. 49 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. Shop No. 54, NTFI Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. ... PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda. 3. The Miryalaguda Municipality, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District, Rep. by its ' commissioner. ...

RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No. 2 and 3 in trying to issue auction notification in respect of the shops allotted to the petitioners videShopNo's. 35, 18,21,61,49, 19,22,42,85,84,40,20,41,. 60,37,33'71,59' 72,6,80 and 54, situated at NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District, though the lease period is subsisting and the petitioners are paying the enhanced rent and trying to dispossess them from their respective shops is nothing but illegal, arbitrary, abuse of process of law, violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to rules and consequently direct the respondents no. 2 and 3 not to conduct the auction in respect of the shops allotted to the petitioners till 2028 and further direct the respondents no.

2 and 3 to continue the petitioners in their respective shops by receiving the enhanced rent as fixed by them. l. A. NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC prayjng that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou( may be pleased To direct the respondents no. 2 and 3 not to dispossess the petitioners from their respective shops i. e. Shop No's. 35, 18, 21,61, 49, 19, 22, 42, 85, 84, 40, 20, 41, 60, 37, 33, 71, 59, 72, 6,80 and 54, situated at NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. S SURENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents No. 1 &2: SRI L. RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, STANDING COUNSEL FOR MUNICIPALITTES The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 11317 of 2O26 Dated: 13.

O4. 2O26 Between R. Saidaiah and others PETITIONERS And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenur: Department, Secretariat, Hyderatrad and others. ... RESPONDENTS ORDER: \ \ Mr. S. Surender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in similar circumstances this court disposed of wp No. 10815 of 2026 by order dated 08. 04. 2026, and prayed to grant similar relief in favour of the petitioners herein. The same is not disputed by Mr. L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revelnue, for respondent No. 2, and Mr. putta Krishna Reddy, learned :standing counsel for respondent No. 3 - Municipality. 2. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing respondent No. 3 to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 30. 03. 2ct26 for i extension of their lease period. Until such ,l representation is disposed of, status quo, obtaining as on today, shall be maintained in respect of their shops bearing Nos.

35, 1g, 2L, 6L, 49, Lg, 22, 42, g5, g4, 40, 20, 4L, 60, 37, 33, 7L, 59, 72, 6, 80 and 54, situated at NTR Shopping comprex, Miryarguda Town, Nalgonda District. Respondent No. 3 is further directed not to evict the petitioners from the subject shops without foilowing due process of law. 3 Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of The misceraneous apprications, pending if any, sha, stand closed. There shall be no order as costs. I Sd/. A. SREENIVASA REDDY RE //TRUE COPYII / SECTION OFFTCER To, 1. Principal Secretary, Ih" Revenue State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda. 3. The Miryaraguda Municiparity, Miryaraguda, Natgonda District, Rep. by its commissioner. 4. One CC to SRt. S SURENDER REDDY, Advocate tOpUCI 5. Two ccs to Gp FoR REVENUE, High court for the state of rerangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 6. one cc to sRr purrA KRTSHNA REDDY, STANDTNG couNSEL FoR MUN|C|PALTT|ES [OPUCI 7.

Two CD Copies Along with a copy of the order dated og. o4. 2o26in w. p No. 10gls of 2o26 DAN/PMK SL HIGH COURT DATEDi 1310412026 ORDER WP. No. 11317 ol 2026 THE t ) U a 1 5 APR ? c? E = * *- DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \0 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE B. VTJAYSEN REDDY Date: 08. 04. 2026 Between: Ch. Venkateshwarlu and six others Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and two others. .. Respondents ORDER: (ORAL) Heard Mr. S. Surender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2; and Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities, appearing for respondent No. 3. The petitioners are tenants occupying Shop Nos. 82, 38, 64, ,2.

70, 44,34 and 43 in the municipal property known as NTR Shopping Complex, Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District. They participated in the auction conducted by respondent No. 3 Municipality in the year 2004, stood as the highest bidders, and were allotted the shops mentiorred above. Since then, they have been paying rent regularly. lnitially the petitioners were allotted the subject shops for a period of five years. subsequently, upon expiry of the initial term, the authorities have been renewing the lease periodically on completion of every three years u,ith corresponding periodic enhancement of monthly rent. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per G. O. Ms. No. 56 dated 05. 02. 2022,lease can be renewed for every three years, and that respondent No. 3 has been periodically renewing the lease irr respect of the subject shops upon completion of every three -rhe years.

petitioners have been paying the rents regularly, and the said rents have been accepted by Respondent No. 3 without any protest. After the expiry of the lease tn 2022, the lease was extended for a further period of three years, until 2025. However, no fresh lease deed was issued to the petitioners. Subsequently, in 2o2s, the lease was again extended for a period of three years. 4. Learned standing counsel for respondent No. 3 furnished written instructions and submitted that the lease of the petitioners expired on 31 . 03. 2022, and that no further extension was granted. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been regularly paying monthly rent, and even for the month of March 2026, the rent was received by respondent No. 3, i which proves that lease of the petitioners is still subsisting and has been extended from 2025 onwards.

Learned counsel has fairly submitted that no written lease deed has been communicated to the petitioners evidencing the extension of the lease-for the periods 2022 to 2025 and 2025 lo 2028. The petitioners submitted a representation dated 30. 03. 2026 to respondent No. 3 requesting to extend their lease period. However, without considering the representation of the. petitioners, the respondents are attempting to issue a tender notification proposing to conduct an auction in respect of the subject shops, without following due process of law. Apprehending such high-handed action of the respondents, the petitioners have approached this Court. 6. lt is borne out from the record that no extension of the lease was granted for the period 2022 lo 2025 or thereafter. However, it remains undisputed that monthly rents were continuously paid by the petitioners, including for the month of March 2026.

As there is no formal extension of lease, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. However, respondent No. 3 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 30. 03. 2026 for extension of their lease period. Until such representation is disposed of, sfafus quo, obtaining as on today, shall be maintained in respect of the subject J { 4 shops. Respondent No. 3 is further directed not to evict the petitioners from the srbject shops without following due process of law' 7. U/ith the above observations and directions; the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed. B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J Date: 08. 04 2026

Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.