Nenavath Srinu v. 1. The State of Telangana

7. Punjala Srinivas Goud, S/o P.Sandaiah Goud, Aged 58 years, Occ; Business, Rl/o H.No. 18-8-2781173 New Rakshapuram Colony, Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing the proceedings bearing ROR No. 8.1513112003 dt. 3011212003 for mutation of the name of the 7th respondent in respect of the tands in Sy.Nos. 684 and 685 admeasuring ac. 5.00 gts., and ac. 1.2O gts., total admeasuring ac. 6.20 gts., situated at Mankhal Revenue village, Maheshwaram Mandal, R.R.District, baserj on the fabricated sale deed bearing Doc.No.725l2003 dt. 251312003 without following the procedure contemplated under the ROR Act as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and u nconstitutional and consequently set aside the same. I.A.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 suspend the proceedings bearing ROR No. 8,1513112003 dt. 30/1212003 issued by the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.LAYEEQ KHAN Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.l to 3 : AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 8 : - The Court made the following ORDER ,/ .// ..a' I HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY - trIRIT PE-TITION No.4488 of 20.25 ORDER It is stated that the grandfather of the petitioner by name . Somla was the owner and possessor of the agricultural land admeasuring Acs.6.20 guntas in Sy.Nos.6B4 and 685 of Mankhal Revenue Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same through registered sale deed bearing document No.J/691, dated 1O.07.1997. It is further stated that after the death of the petitioner's grandfather, the said property was partitioned among his three sons, i.e., the father of the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 and 6. It is further stated that the father of the petitioner has got the land admeasuring Ac.l.27 guntas in Sy.No.684 and Ac.0.2O guntas in Sy.No.685 and the name of the petitioner's father i.e., N.Venkataiah was mutated in all the revenue records and the revenue authorities also issued pattadar passbook bearing No.92918 and Title Deed, No.262212 rn his name under the provisions of the Telagana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1977 and the Rules made thereunder. It is further stated that after the death of his father, when the petitioner rnade an application seeking for mutation of his name and consequential issuance of pattadar passbook over the subject property, he was informed that the names of some third parties are -' -*-a.r--.:.- i I 2 CVBR, J Wp 4488_2025 reflecting in the revenue records as the father of the petittoner and his two brothers have jointly sold the entire lands through registered sa.te deed No.725.of 2OO3, dated 2i;.03.2003. It is further stated that when the petitioner verified the phr:,tographs affixed on the said sale deed, he found that the photograprh affixed on the name of his father is different and the said photoglaph is of respondent N,r.5, who happens to be his relative. Hence the writ petition.

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counscl for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.l to 5 and with their consent, this writ petition is; being disposed of at the admission stage. ln view of the nature of lelief sought for in this writ petit.ion, iss.uance of notice to the uLnofficial respondents is dispensed with.

3. As seen from the record, questioning the sale deecl said to have been executed in favour of respondent No.7 and consequential mutation effected in the revenlle records uide proceedings No.B/5131/2O03, dated 30.12.2OO3, the prer;ent writ petition is filed after a lapse of morethan 21 years seeking for correction of the entries in the revenue records, inviting this Court to decide the validity or otherwise of the sale de.ed and 3 CVBR, I Wp_44 8 8_2 025 consequential mutation. It is settied law that when there are serious disputes with regard to thi nature of documents and their genuineness, this Court in exercise of the summary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constilution of India cannot examine those documents for deciding their validity. Since it is the case of the petitioner that the revenue authorities have not issued any notice while effecting mutation in favour of respondent No.7 and recently he came to know about the alleged sale deed and pattadar passbook issued in favour of respondent No.7, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to agitate his grievances before the competent civil Court by instituting appropriate suit.

4. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of There shall be no order as to costs

5. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. L. LAKSHMI BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR s CTION OFFICER To l.ThePrincipalsecretary,RevenueDepartmentSecretariat'StateofTelangana . at Hyderabad. Z. it "bittria 5. tne iaf,sirOar, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District' +.r*oCCstoGPFoRREVENUE,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Collector, R.R.District District At Kongarakalan' Hyderabad. [OUT] Oie CC to SRt Vt.LRyeEO KHAN, Advocate IOPUCI Two CD CoPies 5 6 SA GJP HIGH COURT DATED:17 10212025 ORDER WP.No.4488 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. 1t l'. :- .-. 2 5 :'[i, ?,]25 a)€.Sr)/iiCa, Y

4. o O >+ i i'' z c' ) .,