High Court · 2025

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 an appropriate writ or order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondent No.2 in issuing proceedings No. E2l95Ot2O24 dt. 11-11-2024 thereby directing the Respondent No. 4 to resume the lands of petitioner in Sy. No. 2715 lo an extent of Ac. 2.30 gts and in Sy. No. 61/38 to an extent of Ac. 5.00 gts both Situated at Sardapur Village, Siricilla Mandal, Ralanna Siricilla District while holding that the said lands are Government lands, which is in the nature of final decision, and with a fu(her direction to mark the said properties as Government land in Dharani portal without issuing any notice to the petitioner is perverse, illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of Natural Justice apart from violative Sec. 4 of The Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and the Articles l4soo-e of the Constitution of tndia. 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 direct the Respondent authorities to restore the entries in Dharani portal by reflecting the name of the petitioner as pattadar against his properties in Sy. No. 2ZlS to an extent of Ac. 2.30 gts and in Sy. No. 61/38 to an extent of Ac. 5.00 gts both situated at sardapur Village, siricilla Mandal, Rajanna siricilla District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. lA NO: 2 OF ?i25 Petition under Section 15i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay the impugned Proc. NO. E2l9sol2o24 dt.l1.11.2024 passed by the Respondent No. 2, pending disposal of the main Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI JOGINIPALLY SAI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI H. SOMAIAH EZRA AGp FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BIIASKAR REDDY WRIT PEf,ITION No.5756 of2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: '....to issue an oppropriate utrit or order or direction more partiatlarty one in the nofire of Wit of Mandamtts declaring the action of respondent No.2 in bsuing proceedings No-82/ 95O/ 2024 dt 11.11.2024 thereby directing respondent No.4 to resume the lands of petitioner in Sy.No.27/ 5 to an ertent of Ac.2.3O gts and in Sg.No.61/ 38 to an ertent of Ac.S.OO gts both Situated at Sardapur vTtlage, Siricilla Mandol" Rajonna Siicilla District while holding ffLatlhe said londs are Gouemment lands uthich is in the noture of final decision and taith a further direction to mark the said 'properties as Gouernnlent land in Dhnrani portal uitlaut issuing ong notice to the petitioner is peruerse illegal, arbitrary and agiinst the pinciples of Noturat Justice apdrt from uiolatiue Straion + oi Tl* Telangana Assigned Laru7s Prohibition of Transfers Ad, 1977 and the Articles 14 and 3OOA of the Constitrttion of Indin... "

2. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri H. Somaiah Ezra Shastri, Iearned Government Pleader for Assignment appearing for the Assistant respondents and perused tJle record.

3. The petitioner claims to be the owrler and possessor of warious extents of agriculture larrd in Sy. No.27/ 5 situated at Sardapur Village, Siricilla Mandal, Rajanna-Siricilla District' having purchased the same under variolrs registered sale deeds' 2 It is stated that respondent No.3-the Additional Collector issued proceedings uide No.E2/9SO/2024, dated 11.11.2024 stating ttrat the name of Sri Bolli Rammohan (petitioner herein) was recorded as pattadar in Sy.No.27/5 to an extent of Ac.2.30 guntas and in Sy.No.6l/3g to an extent of Ac.S.OO guntas irregularly, wherein as per the report submitted by the Tahsildar, Siricilla, the said lands are assigned lands, therefore, directed respondent No.4-the Revenue Divisional Offrcer, to resume the lands in Sy.No.27/S to an extent of Ac.2.30 guntas and in Sy.No.61/38 to an extent of Ac.5.OO guntas situated at Sardapur Village, Siricilla Mandal, Rajalna-siricilla District, considering them as Government land.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said lands are patta lands a.d the revenue authorities have issued pattadar passbooks in favour of the petitioner over the subject lands; and without taking into consideration of the said facts, respondent 3 issued proceedings dated I l.ll.2024 claiming that the said lands as assigned lands.

5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government pleader for Assignment appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that as per the revenue recorcls, the lands in 3 Sy.Nos.27/5 and 61/38 are classi-fied as Government lands, and as per thc policy enunciated by ttre State Government vidc G.O.Ms.No. 1ztO6 dated 25.07-1958, the said lands are assigrred to landless poor persons. It is further submitted that when conversion permission has been obtained by the petitioner suppressing the fact that the nature of the land as assigned land' nespondent No.3 issued proceedings dated 11'11'2O24 directing respondent No.4 to resume the said lands, and there is no iltegality or irregularity in ttre procedure adopted by respondent No.3 and even in the absence of any powers being traceable to respondent No.3, he can exercise tlte powers under Section 166- B of the Telangana [,and Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, as he is having supervisory jurisdiction of all the revenue officers under his control.

6. Be ttrat as it may, since the impugned order' dated ll.tl.2}24 passed by respondent No'3 is only directing respondent No.4 to veri-ff as to whether the said lands are assigned lands as claimed by the Government or patta lands as claimed by the petitioner, t-his Court is of ttre opinion that ends of justice would be met, if respondent No'4 is directed to follow the due procedure by issuing notices to the petitioner before l ) 4 ltcin8 anV action, and a-gter considering the objections and relevant records enclosed by the petitioner in support of his slaim, pass a reasoned order within a period of three (3) montls from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petiticner. Till such ti;ne, status Etoobtaining rn respect of tlte subject on today shall be maintained AS Property, in all respects. 7 With the above observations, this Writ petition is d.isposed of. No order as to costs As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //rRUE copy// *ti"+l'At'$5iE sEcfloNHFFIcER ffffiffiru--ru*ltr**::::: To, 1

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. M-' "a. TJ/B HIGH COURT DATED:2510212025 I ORDER WP.No.5756 of Z02S eJ o J ( o R THE l4 .( a4 30 JUN 20[ t)F.s o 4TCHEo DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1 / 6