The High Court · 2025

9. Ponna Srisailam, S/o. Pochaiah, Aged about 26 years, Occ. Govt. Employee, R/o. Alimpur Village, Bachannapet Mandal, Jangaon District ...PETITIONERS AND 1 The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. z. I ne unrel uommrssroner Tor Lan0 Aomrnrstrauon (uuLA), Ior Ine state ot Telangana at Nampally, Hyderabad

3. The District Collector, Jangaon District at Jangaon. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangaon Revenue Division, Jangaon District 5. Tahsildar, [\/andal Revenue Office, Bachannapeta, Jangaon District. 6. Chewella Siddaiah, S/o. llaiah, Aged about 65 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o.ltikalapally Village, Bachannapet Mandal, Jangaon District. 7 8 o Chewella Swamy @ Moddu Swamy, S/o. Siddaiah, Aged about 29 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o. ltikalapally Vil[age, Bachannapet Manda l, Jangiaon District. Chiluka Balaiah, S/o. Peddulu, Aged about 62 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl,/o. Katkur @ Solamail Village, Bachannapet Mand-al, Jangaon District. Chevella Swamy @ B_akka Swamy, S/o. late Siddaiah, Aged about 28 years, 9pq .put Employee, Fl/o.ltika lapa lly Village, Bachannapel IVandat, Jangaon District. ...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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAIVUS declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 5 in entertaining the representation of the unofficial respondents for conducting enquiry over the Iands of the petitioners in Sy.Nos.147, 148 and .149 situated al Itikaiapally Village. Bachannapeta tr,4andal, Jangaon District under File No. Rc. No. 8/223612024 of the 5th respondent at the behest of the unofficial respondents as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and consequenfly direct the respondents 3 to 5. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in File No.Rc. No.81223612024 of the 5th respondent in respect of the lands of the petitioners in Sy.Nos.147, 149 and 14g situated at Itikalapally village, Bachannapeta tr/landal, Jangaon District, pending finalization of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI NARENDAR JALLI Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 5: ASST. Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.6 to 9: - - - - The Court made the following: ORDER -r{ HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.269 of 2o25 ORDER: It is stated that the petitioners are the owners and possessors of various extents ol lands forming part of Sy.No. 147 and its sub-divisions, situated at Itikalapally Village, Bachannapet Mandal, Jangaon District. It is further stated that the said property was purchased by the ancestors of the petitioners through sada bainama and subsequently, the said sada bainama was validated f regularized under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, l97l arld the Rules made thereunder. It is further stated that when one Dhacharam Bikshapathi and another were trying to inlerfere with their possession and enjoyment over the subject land, the petitioners were constrained to institute a suit uide O.S.No.2O5 of 2013 and the said suit was decreed in the year

2019. It is furLher stated that O.S.No.345 of 2Ol9 was filed seeking for perpetual injunction against the petitioners before the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Jangaon and the said Court granted or7 interim injunction and the said suit is pending. It is further stated that the unofhcial respondents have filed an appeal before the Special Tribunal seeking for correction of the 2 CVB& J wp J.69 202s entries made in favour of the petitioners and the saLid appeal was dismissed uide No.ll2025l2019, dated 30.01.2021. The grievance of the petitioners is that the responclent authorities l,vithout taking into consideration of the dismissal of the appeal and also the regularization of the sada Lrainama in the name of the ancestors of the petitioners, have issued the impugned notice in File No.B/223612024, dated 1O.09.2024 actrng on the complaint being submitted by the persons, u,ho lost their case before the Special Tribunal.

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and with their consent, this writ oetition is disposed of at the admission stage.

3. Sri Jalli Kanakaiah, learned Senior Counscl representing Sri Narendar Jalli, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has vehemently contended that if once the unolficial respondents lost their rights before the appellate authority, they are not having any right of making fresh application l complaint before respondent No.S seeking to conduct an cnquiry and acting on the said complaint and issuance of impugnc,l notice is without jurisdiction and since respondent No.5 is n.ot having jurisdiction to entertain any complaint subsequent to the appeal -./' i I i I I r I "::, *xrl. 3 CVBR, J Wp_269 2025 being dismissed by the Special Tribunal, this Writ Petition is maintainable questioning the impugned notice under Article 226 of Lh,e Constitution of India

4. Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5, has submitted that the appeal filed by one Chevella Balarah, uide Appeal No.L1202512019 has been dismissed on 30.01.2021 pertaining some of the survey numbers of the subject property and survey numbers pertaining to this writ petition are not covered by the orders of the appeliate authority as such there is no illegality or irregularity in issuing the impugned notice. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that the petitioners, instead of hling a representation before the competent authority enclosing the documents, have hled the present writ petition and the present writ petition filed is misconceived and prayed to dismiss the same.

5. The case of the respondent authorities is that the survey numbers mentioned in this writ petition are not covered in the orders of the appellate authority and as per the complaint submitted by the unofficial respondents for conducting an enquiry the impugned notice was issued by respondent No.5. If 4 CVBR, J \*'p 269 2025 it is the case of the petitioners that the subject lands of the impugned notice are purchased by their forelathers under sada bainama, which was subsequently validated r rnder the provisrons of the Act and the appeal filed by the contesting respondents has already been dismissed, they are entitled to submit alt explanation/ representation duly enclosing the documents before respondent No.S, who is the primary and recording authority for making entries in the revenue records. Since rt is stated by the learned Senior Counsel that the petitioners have already submitted an explanation duly enclosing all the relevant documents before respondent No.S and even after receiving the same, without condr:cting any enquiry respondent No.5 is making efforts for. lorcible dispossession of the petitioners at the instancc of rr:spondent Nos.6 to 9.

6. In view of the above submissions, this Courl , without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter and since it is stated that the petitioners have already submitted explanation to the impugned notice Rc.No.B/2236 12024, d.ated 70.O9.2024 duly enclosing ail the necessary clocuments, deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ petition directing responjent No.5 to conduct enquiry duly taking into i l I ). I I I i 5 CVBR, J wp 269_202s consideration of the documents enclosed by the petitioners and after providing an opportunity to the petitioners as well as to the unofficial respondents, pass appropriate orders in accordance with Iaw following the guidelines issued by Full Bench of this Court in Chinnam Pandurangam v. Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal and othersr and conclude the enquiry as early as possible, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Til1 such time, stalus quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained in all respects.

6. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs 7 . As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/-V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SEC N OFFICE R Secretariat, Hyderabad. Telanqana at Nampally, HYderabad. '1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, The State of Telangana, z. ine cniet iorirmissioner for Land Administration (ccLA), for the state of 3. The District Collector, Jangaon District at Jangaon. i. fi-iu n"*nre S. fafrsitOar, Mandal Revenue Office, Bachannapeta, J-angaon District' 6. One CC to SRI NARENDAR JALLI, Advocate [OPUC-] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State ot lelangana' 8. Two CD CoPies O"fficer, Jangaon Rev-enue Division, Jangaon District -Oirislon"t BN ' AtR 2oo8 AP I5 l l I I i I I i l To, g HIGH COURT DATED:0610112025 ORDER WP.No.269 of 2025 -r ,i li 'r 4 rt' 'i:. ( q 04 L 2[25 * ,:$.-o +-:--;.1 \-:-----: a .b DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS d[*'uffi