1. This Writ Petition is filed with the following prayer:

               “…to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of fourth and fifth respondents in forcibly seeking to evict petitioners from their agricultural land admeasuring 9 acres situated in Survey No.222 of Donpal Village, Morthad Mandal, Nizamabad District and destroying soya bean crop with blade tractor and cattle sheds and dry borewells as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct respondents to pay compensation of sum of Rs.2,00,000/- per acre to petitioners and a sum of Rs.50,000/- each for damaging cattle shed and pass such other order or orders…”

2. Heard Ms. P.Sumalatha, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for official respondents.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners are the owners of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.9.00 guntas in Sy.No.222 of Donpal Village, Morthad Mandal, Nizamabad District, and that they are eking out their livelihood by doing agriculture and rearing cattle. It is further submitted that the subject land was assigned in favour of petitioner’s parents and that pattas were granted. It is also submitted that names of petitioners were entered into revenue records, being the successors of original assignees and that pattadar passbooks and title deeds have been issued and since then, petitioners are in physical possession of the subject land.

4. It is submitted that official respondent Nos.4 and 5 are forcibly trying to evict the petitioners from the subject land admeasuring Acs.9.00 guntas situated in Sy.No.222 of Donpal Village, Morthad Mandal, Nizamabad District, by destroying the soya bean crop. Copy of proceedings of Tahsildar (Ex.PI, page Nos.12 to 15), copy of pattadar passbooks (Ex.PII, page Nos.16 to 23), copy of pahanies (Ex.PIII, page Nos.24 to 31) and copy of photographs (Ex.PIV, page Nos.32 and 33) are annexed as documents to the writ papers in support of the petitioners’ case.

5. It is submitted that earlier a writ petition was filed in year 1995, when the land was sought to be acquired by Government and that the Court granted interim order and subsequently, respondents have not acquired the subject land.

6. It is submitted that bhoomi pooja was scheduled to be performed on 20.08.2016 for construction of Government building(s) in the subject land and that if the same is performed, petitioners would be put to irreparable loss and injury. It is further submitted that petitioners are in continuous possession of the subject land for the last 42 years, which was assigned to their parents and that respondents cannot evict them. It is submitted that acts of official respondent Nos.4 and 5 in forcibly trying to evict petitioners from their agricultural land by destroying their  crops are illegal and arbitrary and hence, a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- per acre be paid and a sum of Rs.50,000/- for damaging the cattle sheds.

7. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for official respondents submitted that acts complained of by petitioners are not true and that official respondent Nos.4 to 6 have inspected the Government land in Sy.No.222, wherein the names of petitioners were recorded as pattadars in the revenue records. It is further submitted that respondent authorities only enquired about the mode of acquisition and that the said enquiry was misconstrued by petitioners, as if land was being sought for the purpose of construction of Government building(s). It is also submitted that except petitioner Nos.2 and 3, petitioner Nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are original assignees/LRs and that no bore wells are existing in the subject land and that petitioners are not cultivating the subject land and the land is lying fallow for several years.

8. On the basis of the documents filed by Tahsildar i.e., details of Bhu Bharati, copy of pattadar passbooks, copy of village pahani details report, copies of pahanies, copy of report of Mandal Surveyor, Sethwar, location sketch, copy of the details of proposed reassignment of assigned lands and Government lands and copy of order of Collector etc., the documents annexed to additional counter affidavit from page Nos.13 to 30, it is submitted that petitioners are not in possession of subject property and that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 purchased the said land from assignees in an extent of Acs.2.34 guntas and Acs.1.20 guntas respectively. It is further submitted that land of petitioners is not requisitioned by any of the official respondents, much less, bhoomi pooja is not underway (as averred at paragraph No.5 of the counter affidavit filed on 07.02.2026). The same contents are reflected in paragraph No.6 of the additional counter affidavit filed on 08.04.2026.

9. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and considered the rival submissions.

10. It is the case of petitioners that they are successors of original assignees (their parents were assigned Government lands by then Tahsildar, Armoor, vide proceedings No.D.Dis/B3/10117/74 dated Nil.01.1975) of land admeasuring Acs.9.00 guntas in Sy.No.222 of Donpal Village, Morthad Mandal, Nizamabad District. That they being the successors, their names were mutated in revenue records and pattadar passbooks and title deeds were issued and claim that they dug bore wells and have been cultivating the subject land by obtaining electricity connection and raised cattle sheds.

11. No documents are placed on record by petitioners to show that a requisition has been sought for by any of the official respondents, specifically respondent Nos.4 and 5, for construction of Government buildings in their lands. Petitioners are under an apprehension that their land was being sought for the purpose of construction of Government building(s). A visit was done by respondent Nos.4 and 5, who enquired about the mode of acquisition of lands by petitioners.

12. At paragraph No.5 of the counter affidavit filed in the month of February, 2026, it is reflected that official respondent Nos.4 to 6 visited the lands of petitioners only for the purpose of enquiry to the mode of acquisition of land admeasuring Acs.9.00 guntas in Sy.No.222 by petitioners and that it was misconstrued, as if the subject land was being sought for the purpose of construction of Government buildings. It is further reflected in the contents of counter affidavit that land of petitioners was not requisitioned by any of the official respondents, much less, no bhoomi pooja was proposed to be held on 20.08.2016 for construction of Government buildings.

13. History of the lands assigned, extent of lands assigned, sales and purchases made has been reflected in the additional counter affidavit filed in April, 2026, this Court is not inclined to delve into these aspects.

14. It is apparent from the contents of the counter affidavit and the additional counter affidavit that there is no requisition by any of the official respondents for the lands of petitioners and no bhoomi pooja for construction of Government buildings is proposed and both acts are denied by the Tahsildar. The petitioners are clearly under a misconception.

15. In the light of the statements in the counter affidavit and additional counter affidavit, the apprehension of petitioners that official respondents had visited their lands for the purpose of acquiring their lands for construction of Government buildings is misconceived. Though, it is claimed that soya bean crop has been destroyed by use of tractors brought into the lands of petitioners and that their cattle sheds and bore wells have been destroyed, nothing has been placed on record to substantiate these statements. It is observed from the photographs filed at page Nos.32 and 33 of writ papers that lands are plain lands and no crop is visible to the naked eye (in spite of they being colour photographs). The statements made in the writ affidavit do not demonstrate that their crop has been destroyed and cattle sheds were damaged and the compensation sought as pleaded in the writ affidavit does not have legs to stand, the prayer for compensation is invalid. In fact, no cattle sheds are even noticed in the photographs.

16. This Court is not inclined to indulge in any such statements, which are not substantiated. Needless to state that official respondents have to follow due process of law, if they require lands and official respondents cannot enter into the land and seek an enquiry into the mode of acquisition, when the names of petitioners are mutated in the revenue records and pattadar passbooks and title deeds have been issued. The enthusiasm shown by official respondents has created apprehension in the minds of petitioners and the same made them to file this writ petition. As there is no requisition of land of petitioners by respondent authorities, the apprehension of petitioners is misconceived and no further orders are required to be passed.

17. For reasons aforesaid, this Court deems it appropriate to close the writ petition and accordingly, the writ petition stands closed. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.