High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 oI lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and declaring the order of the 2nd respondent passed in Revision Petition No E5/1009/2014' dated 21-03-2017 in so far as upholding the order of the 3rd respondent passed in appeal No A"/4 O42|2O1O ' dated 1B-02- 2014, cancelling the pattadar passbook and title deed of the petitioner in respect of the land in Sy.No 273lA admeasuring Ac 1-00 guntas of Somidi Village' KazipeilVlandal, Warangal District on the ground that that the subject property is not agricultural land, as illegal' arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 300-4 of ,,/ the constitution ol I rd iir apart from being violative of princip,les :f n rtural justice and consequently scrt it; de the same t.A. NO: 1 OF 201 ,lvlP NO: 25260 OF 201 7l Petitionuncle'{i':cttonl5lCPCprayingthatinthe()lrcumstlncesstated in the affidavit filed n {;rrpport of the petition, the High Court m'ay b': pleased to suspend the orderr ol the 3rd respondent passed in appeal No't '1404212010' daled 18-02-201r, as r:onfirmed by the 2nd respondent in tlevi ion Petition No.E5/1009/2014 datrJ 21-03-2017. pending disposal of th'3 mzrin v /rii Petition' Counsel for the Petitirrner: SRI SRICHARAN TELAPROLU Counsel for the Resp':ndents No' 1 to 4: AGP FOR REVENIJE Counsel for the Resp,:ndent No.5: SRI G' L' NARASIMHA RAO The Court made the f,:llowing: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K'SARATH w.P.No.20613of 2ot7 ORDER: This writ Petition is filed questioning the order Passed Petition Revision No.E .resPondent No'2 5llOOgl2|l4 dated 2l'O3'2O17 in upholding the order ed by the respondent No'3 in Appeal No'N4Oa2l2O1O dated 18.02'2014 as illegal and arbitrary' 2. Heard learned counsel for the Assistant Government Pleader for *"Jenue and Sri espondent No'5' G.L.Narasimha Rao' learned counsel for the itioner, learned '"1 I that the submits

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner of the agricultural petitioner is absolute owner and possessor land admeasuring to an extent of Ac' 1-00 in SY.No.273lA situated at somidi vilrage, Kazipet Mandar, warangal District' having purchased the samc through simple sale deed dated 14.06' 1994 from one Paladugula Cheralu for valid sale consideration' After purchase' the name of the petitioner was mutated in the revenue records and pattadar passbook ald title d.eed rvere issued in his favour by the respondent No'4 2 SK, J W P.l i.20613 of 2011 and sinco 'h,: ,late of purchase, he is cuitivating r.he ;aid land without el'; i lterruption. While so, the resprtnci,:nt \o.5 has filed applrc.ation before the respondent No.ll Revenue Divisional Ofiicer, Warangal, for cancellation of pattadar passbook anrl :itle deed issued to the petitioner. He submits that thoug.r ttLe respondent No.4, after conrlucr.ine enquiry has subrnltt,rl a report stating that the pelitlo ter has purchaserl the subject land from paladugula rlheralt , r.i,ho is the pattacar o'the said iand, the respondent I,Io.3 orr ered for cancellatior: o ' pattadar passbook and title clee,l is sued in favour of tire oetitioner vide proceedings No.A/:1 O, 2/2O1O dated 18.O2 .2O14 on the ground that the sub.iecr lan 1 is not agricultur:rl lzL.t d. euestioning the same, the pe 1 itlo ter has filed a revisio r petition before the respondenr_ Nc,.2 Lnd the salrre was disposed of by upholding the order par;sec b5. the responden - Nc.3 vide Revision petition No.lI5i IOO)/2014 dated 21.0 3.:20 i 7.

4. LearrLe:l (),runsel for the petitioner further sl- bm ts that the respond:nt Nos.2 and 3 ought to have seen tl at the respondent Vr,.z., after conducting due enquiry urtr er the provisions c f "elalgana Rights in Land and p rttadar J SK. J W.P.No.20613 of 2017 Passbooks Act, l97 l,has issued pattadar passbook and title deed in favour of the petitioner in respect of the subject land' HefurthersubmitsthattherespondentNo.2oughttohave seen that there are no residential houses existing in the subject property either physically or in the revenue records and the subject land is agricuitural land ald the respondent Nos.2arrd3haveerroneouslypassedtheimpugnedorders and requested to allow the writ petition by setting aside the impugned orders' 5. At the time of admission' this Court granted interim order of status quo as regards entries in 1-B register as on date pending further orders' In spite of lapse of more than seven (7) years, the official respondents or unofficial respondent did not choose to file counter or vacate petitron denying the averments made in the petition' ln spite of several adjournments for filing counter' the respondents have failed to file counter and finally on 26 'O3 '2025 ' this Court has forfeited.therightoflrlingcounterbytherespondents. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for submits that as the respondent No '4-Tahsildar has not Revenue 4 SK. J W P ',10.20613 of2017 regularize I _l.le unregistered sale deed execur ed tl. 1te person who is rLo(. it pattadar and the land is not utgrr<:ult rral land, the resocn,ie nt No.2 has passed the rmprgn:d order ca,celling tlrr: pattadar pass book and title rleec in favour of the petitio ne r ar-rd the s€une was upheld b-y thc r-e ;pondent No.3 by rhe .rrLpugned order and there is no nee,l tc interfere with by this rr.urt and requested to dismiss the *r-it >etrtion. 7 . Learr e<l Counsel for the respondent Nc.5 l;ub: oits that as the su:rjr::t land is not agricultural land, th, official respondents lr,t.r,e rightly passed the impugned orr ers and requested t I rl i,;miss the writ petition. B. After -rez.l.ing both sides and perusal of the rcc rrd. this Court is of he considered view that the petitic,ner is ,u,ngp og the lald adrreasuring to an exterit of Ac. 1 0O gts tn Sy.No.273/rtr r; tuated at Somidi Village, Kazrpet v{anclal, Warnagal D slrrct having purchased through srmp e s rle cleed dated 14 O j .lttg4 . Thereafter, the said strle de, d \vas regularizecl tv I he competent authority and is;sue d I attadar passbook a nrl title deed in favour of he pe [itioner on 06. 1I.2O)i' and the same was verified and iecli recl as ) SK, J W P No.20613 of 2017 the Talisildar, Hanamkonda Mandal genuine by ot 25.06.201O and the same was shown in the material papers filed along with the writ petition at page Nos'36 and

41. While being so, the respondent No'5 has filed ROR appeal against the mutation proceed ings granted in favour of the petitioner before the respondent No'3 alleging that the petitioner has created some documents and without her knowledge obtained pattadar pass book and incorporated his nameintherevenuerecordsinrespectofthesubjectlandby enciosing the will deed and requested to cancel the patta issued in favour of the petitioner' After hearing both sides' the respondent No'3 held that on verification of File No.A/1701/06, the unregistered sale deed dated 14'06'1994 was executed in favour of the petitioner in respect of the subject land and as the name of the vendor of the petitioner is not recorded as pattadar and moreover the entire lald is shown in the occupation column as 'residential houses" the Tahsildar, Hanamkonda has erred in regularizing the unregistered sale made by the person who is not a pattadar arrd the said land is not agricultural land and passed Proc'No'A/404212O1O impugned 6 SKJ r/! P to 20613 of2O17 dated llr. )2 . z O24 by setting aside the mutzLtion pr cceedings granted ir-r lz.vour of the petitioner in File N o.A / 170 I /06 dated29.l0.1t07 9 . Th e 1_ c..it roner has filed revision pel itior-r l_- :fore the responde n I \ o .2 questioning the order pas sed b.r. the responde nt I'lr.3. pending revision, the respcndent No.2 has called for' :'e l(,r1 from the respondent No.4-l.ah s;ilcli r and in response t ) L ''r e same, the respondent No.4 has srLl mitted a report in F.c.llt.Bl234Z l2Ol4 dated 16.07.2(1 14 ste:ing thar during erLqr-rirl . it revealed that the lald in guestior is patta land consi-.lnE an extent of Ac. 1_00 gts in Sy.No. 273 sitr_rated at Somidi l:r3c of Hanamkonda Mandal ancl Sri Rz iraboina Ilaiah s/o. !{ir laral-r i.e., petitioner, is in possesjsro.r of the subject le rrrl ir tcl some of the extent . of land in qu ,stion is follou' and siorrL,l extent is shown paddy seed. While c sposing of the revisior' lilcd by the petitioner, the respondent Iio.2 has mentionec u'r I regard to the report submitl ecl b.v the respondent r\o 1. but he has not taken into ar:coLrnl. he said report anc rp lr eld the orders of the respondent lrlo.l as the subject prop er t\ is residential but not agriculturai iar-rr . 'il ,ll 7 SK, J W P.No.20613 of2017

10. The finding of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 is only basing on the words mentioned in the pahani Adangals that below the narne ol the petitioner, it is mentioned as 'residential house', but there is no mention what is the extent of land covered by the residential house and on the sarne Adangal, the name of the petitioner shows about possession of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.l.OO gts. The petitioner is having pattadar pass book and title deed with regard to the land admeasuring to an exLent of Ac. 1-00 gts. Once there is a clear mention about possession of the said land in the Adangal and the petitioner is enjoying the said land, merely mentioning the word 'residential house'without mentioning the extent of said house, the respondent authorities cannot take into account the same and declare the land is not in agricultural use and cannot set aside the mutation proceedings granted in favour of the petitioner 1 1. The enquiry report submitted by the Tahsildar dated 16.07.2014 cleaiy shows that the entire land is in possession of the petitioner and some of the extent of land in question is follow and some extent of the iand is in agricultura-l use. In spite of that the revisional authority i.e, \l '.J 8 SKJ W P No.20613 of 2017 the re:rprrLdent No.2 has upheld the ord=r cf tL e respondent No.3 arcr r he said finding of the revisionzJ arrthr ritv and also the aplrell:.te authority is nithout any basis ancl ; _roreover, respcn:icrL _ No.5 has not claimed that thr: subje r t property is not zrqrir.;ltr-rral land and both the appeltate as well as revisi trra i uthorities without any basis and rrerr l_v basing on the said r: rrr-v in the pahani have set aside t re mutation procer-'i ing r; granted in favour of the peti tioner t nd the said actiort r,fl L I e responclent Nos.2 and 3 is li.eble to be set aside and th, nrLltation proceedings granted in far our of the petitionr.r lrave to be continued as per the pro:eer ings issued b1' the 'l'irlLr; ldar on 06.ll.2OOZ. 12. [ ^ h: rcspondent No.5 has any right o..er- :he subject proper _\.. ;l c is at liberty to approach tLLe com retent Civil Court f .>r declaration of title. Merell, l:asin 3 on the ()n filed by the respondent No.5, the -espondent . crtrrn rt set aside the mutation proc,:edings issued in favour o1 ti- r: petitioner stating that the srrbject I tnd is not agricultu -a L and. In view of the same, tht: orCer passed by the resJronrl,:nt No.3 dated 1g.02.2074 and the cor sequential resl,onctent No.2 I) rssed repres€ltta: No.3 a o SK, J W P.No 206i 3 of2017 dated 21.03.2017 are liable to be set aside' The respondent No.5 is at liberty to approach the competent civil Court for declaration of title. 1 3. In view of the above findings, the Writ Petition is allowed, by setting aside the order passed by the respondent No.3 in Appea-l No.\40a2 12010 dated L8022074 and the order passed by the respondent No'2 in Revision Petition No.E5/ 1OO9 I 2Or4 dated 21.O3.2017 .

14. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in this r'r'rit petition, shall stand closed. That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as above' Witness the HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL' on this Wednesday, The Eighteerii'O'v tr l'"t' Two Thousand and Twenty Five' SD/-K. SREE RAMA MURTHY DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE coPY// sEcrloN oFFlcER The PrinciDal Secretary, Department of Revenue State of Telangana' ?i:"F:';: 3ll';tJti;P.?lft l"o,i'J.t i["3S,i.ctor, wa ran ga r U rba n District ry#T8;i.r". Divisional officer-cum-Appellate^Authoritv' A P Rishts in Land and pattadar passbooks n"i,'i!zi ,'w'riri"gal. warangai District ?# t;ilid; ;, rr-rip"t Ma ndal, wara nsal. D istrict' b C iiitn r s n ib Hnnniltr LnCC6t-u' Advoc.ate [oP u cl Two CCs to GP for R"r.;;;"tiigd-C1-urt tor the State of Telangana at o Bx1"6tt?S JR|J] r *o*", r rA RAo, Advocate roP u cl Two CD CoPies ""., To, ,1 2 3 4 E 6 WL. IIP BS a

1.. ,/1 HIGl.I COURT DATED:1x110612025 -----1- 'rlE i ..! o(i k J C o 0'l ,ltt ?t D Z ) r_1 ORDER WP.No.206'13 of 2017 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOIIT COSTS 1 1?)