v Pushpamma v. 1. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

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 or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no.2 in passing the impugned orders in Appeal No. Dt2483l2}1g dated. 311212019 without hearing the petitioner and the consequential proceedings no..D/29512020 dt 131212020 of the 4th respondent pending disposal of the Revision no.F21345412019 as illegal, arbitrary, high handed and in gross violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to enter the name of the petitioner in revenue records and issue Pattadar pass-book and title deed to the petitioner in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 oJleration of orders in Appeal No. D/248312019 dated. 311212019 of the Znd Respondent and the consequential Proceedings No.D/295/2020 dt 131212020 of the 4th Respondent in the interest of justice. : Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI CH SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents No 1 To 4 : AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No 5: --- The Court marle the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL IIIRIT No.512O oF 2o.2o ORDER: This writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of mandarnus to declare the action of Respondent No.2 in passing the impugned orders in Appeal No.D/2483/2019, dated 03.12.2OL9, withor+t hearing the petitioner, and the consequential proceedings No.D/29512020, dated L3.O2.2O2O, of the 4th respondent, pending disposal of Revision No.F2/3454/2O19, as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner further seeks. a direction to the respondents to enter her narne in the revenue records and to issue a pattadar passbook and title deed in her favor.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, appearing online, submits that the husband of the petitioner, namely Late Yadagiri, was the absolute owller and posgessor of agricultural land admeaswing Ac.1 26% guntas in \ Sy.No.806/A and Ac.O.20 guntas in Sy.No.844/AA, totaling \ Acs.2.O6Yz guntas, situated at Mandanpalli Village, Hlo. Page 2 of5 :'l': Kolluru lRevenue village, Alair Mandal, yadadri-Bhongir District (hereinafter referred to as the .subject propertJr), having purchased the sarne through a registered sale deed bearing Document No.46 3 / LgBs, dated 06.05. lggs. After his death, thr: petitioner and her sons, as legar heirs, have been in possesrsion and enjoyment of the subject property. The petitioner made a representation to the 4th respondent on

16.1 1 .2o L4 for mutation of her name in the revenue records. However, the 4th respondent, after conducting a local enquiry, passed orders stating that the family members of the purc.aaser, through an ordinary sare deed executed by Maturi Abbaiatr during his lifetime, are in possession of the land and that Smt. Bhagramma, the Sft respondent herein, was not in possession of the land. The 4u, respondent further directed the petitioner to approach the competent civil court, as the a-rthorities could not interfere in respect of disputed lands as per Government Memo No.5813g/ss- LA/201o-8, dated 30.l2.2oLo, vide orders in Memo No.B/ 13go/2o1s, dated 19.06.2015. Page 3 of5

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aggrieved by the orders of the 4tt, respondent, the sth respondent preferred an appeal before the 3'd respondent, who in turn passed. orders in File No.D/2453/2O19, dated

03.12.2019, allowing the appeal filed by the 5th respondent, thereby setting aside the enfir made in favor of the husband of the petitioner. The 3'd respondent also directed the 4tr' respondent to issue the pattadar passbook and title deed in favor of the 5th respondent. Consequently, the 4tt' respondent passed Proceedings No.B/29512O2O, dated |3-O2.2O2O, granting succession in favor of the Sth respondent. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred a revision before the 2nd respondent vide Revision No.F2 / 3 454 I 2Ol9 .

4. He further submits that during the pendency of this writ petition, the 2.d respondent passed orders in Revision No.F2/345412OL9 on 18.O6.2O2L. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred writ Petition No.21168 of 2O2L, which is curr6ntly pending. Therefore, he submits that the cause in the present writ petition no longer survives for \ \ I \ \ Page 4 of5 further c()nsideration, and he seeks dismissal of this writ petition as infructuous.

5. Lea.::ned Assistant Government pleader, representing the learrred Government Pleader for Revenue, raises no objection to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the pe,titioner.

6. Recording the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There s.eall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellarreous petitions, if any, pending, shalt stand dismisseC I To, ,SD/.T. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY//

1. One CC to SRI CH SRINIVAS Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

3. Two C;D Copies D.N BS $L HIGH COURT DATED:18/0912025 \ \ 'l trJ () c) 2 g JA}l 2020 * t'--. | . I 1r.i ->j -).'- :l' ORDER WP.No.S120 of 2020 I I I i i i i I i i i I i j ! I i I I I I i I I I I i I I I I I Ii I ! i DISMISSiING THE WRIT PETITION INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS @c$,,ttt