Sunil Kumar Agarwal vs The State of Telangana Advocate - GP FOR REVENUE — WP/17362/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Next hearing: 29th June 2026.

Next hearing 29-Jun-2026

CNR: HBHC010355332026

Filing Number

WP/25777/2026

Filing Date

08-Jun-2026

Registration No

WP/17362/2026

Registration Date

08-Jun-2026

Judge

B.Vijaysen Reddy

Coram

B.Vijaysen Reddy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 28 )

Sub-Category

MISCELLANEOUS ( 89 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT Section

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sunil Kumar Agarwal

    Adv. A NAREN RUDRA

  2. 2.P. Samata

  3. 3.Mayank Gupta

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Telangana Advocate - GP FOR REVENUE

  2. 2.The District Collector

  3. 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer

  4. 4.The Tahsildar

  5. 5.Thakur Jai Singh

Case History

  1. 29-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 29-Jun-2026

    Admission (Revenue)

    B.Vijaysen Reddy

  3. 08-Jun-2026

    B.Vijaysen ReddyView PDF

    Case Summary: WP No. 17362 of 2026 The High Court of Telangana issued a show-cause notice to respondent No. 5 (Thakur Jai Singh) on 8 June 2026, directing him to respond by 29 June 2026 why the writ petition challenging the Tahsildar's notice (B/113/2026) should not be admitted. The court granted an interim stay on all proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice pending the next hearing, accepting the petitioners' contention that they were not parties to the underlying suit O.S. No. 290 of 2020. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 08-Jun-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 08-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/17362/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP No. 17362 of 2026 The High Court of Telangana issued a show-cause notice to respondent No. 5 (Thakur Jai Singh) on 8 June 2026, directing him to respond by 29 June 2026 why the writ petition challenging the Tahsildar's notice (B/113/2026) should not be admitted. The court granted an interim stay on all proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice pending the next hearing, accepting the petitioners' contention that they were not parties to the underlying suit O.S. No. 290 of 2020. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case