Chinna Pasi vs The State of Telangana Advocate - GP FOR REVENUE — WP/17790/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Next hearing: 09th July 2026.

CNR: HBHC010367922026

Next Hearing

09th July 2026

Filing Number

WP/26675/2026

Filing Date

10-06-2026

Registration No

WP/17790/2026

Registration Date

10-06-2026

Judge

B.Vijaysen Reddy

Coram

B.Vijaysen Reddy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 28 )

Sub-Category

NOT TO INTERFERE ( 58 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT Section

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

Chinna Pasi

Adv. K RAGHAVA RAMANA

SmtKaisalya Bai Pasi

Respondent(s)

The State of Telangana Advocate - GP FOR REVENUE

The District Collector

The Tahsildar

The Divisional Forest Officer

Adv. GP FOR FORESTS

Hearing History

Judge: B.Vijaysen Reddy

11-06-2026

ADMISSION (REVENUE)

09-07-2026

ADMISSION (REVENUE)

Orders

11-06-2026
B.Vijaysen Reddy

Case Summary: WP 17790/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned to 09.07.2026 with interim protective orders. The Telangana High Court partially granted interim relief to petitioners Chinna Pasi and Kaisalya Bai Pasi, who challenged forest department attempts to dispossess them from 10.15 acres of land in Rompaid Village. The court directed the Tahsildar and Divisional Forest Officer not to interfere with petitioners' possession of any plantations or standing crops without following due process of law, while permitting land demarcation activities. Respondents must file counters by the next hearing date, and all respondent actions remain subject to further court orders. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP 17790/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned to 09.07.2026 with interim protective orders. The Telangana High Court partially granted interim relief to petitioners Chinna Pasi and Kaisalya Bai Pasi, who challenged forest department attempts to dispossess them from 10.15 acres of land in Rompaid Village. The court directed the Tahsildar and Divisional Forest Officer not to interfere with petitioners' possession of any plantations or standing crops without following due process of law, while permitting land demarcation activities. Respondents must file counters by the next hearing date, and all respondent actions remain subject to further court orders. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case