A three-Judge Bench of this Court in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Shri Balwant Regular Motor Service, Amravati Ors

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances siated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus. a) To declare tire action of the 2nd Respondent and rejecting the online application dated 04.03.2021 submitted by the petitioner through online as illegal, void, arbitrary and violative of the principles of naturaljustice. b) To deelare the proceedings of the 4th Respondent vide file no. Bl91t2O22 dated 11.02.2022 as illegal, vold, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice. c) Consequently set aside the proceedings of the 4th Respondent vide file no. Bl91l2O22 dated 1 1 .O2.2O22 and direct the 2nd Respondent to mutate the name of the petitioner in the revenue records in respect of the land an extent of Ac.2.10 tt: Gts in Sy.No. 60(Minj) situated at Jampally Village, Bibinagar lt/andal Yadadri Bhongiri District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court ma'l be pleased to a- direct the a) Respondent No.5 not to alienate the agricultural land bearing Sy.No. 60(Minj) admg. Ac. 2-10 Gts., situated at Jampally Village, Bitrinagar Mandal Yadadri Bhongiri District. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be.pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 and 4 not to mutate the name of the Rerspondent No.5 in the revenue records in respect of the land in Sy.No. 6ct(N/ini) an extent of Ac.2.10 Gts., situated at Jampally Village, Bibinagar [\/andal Yadadri Bhongiri District, ppnding disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DEVULAPALLI BRAHMAM Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 4: SRI L.RAVINDER, l\GP FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent No.S: =- The Court made the following: ORDER -t I HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.65O5 of 2o25 ORDER: It is stated that the father of the petitioner by name Edunoju Vishnumurthy @ Vishnu Chary had purchased the agricultural land admeasuring Acs. 13.10 guntas in Sy.No.9 (Minj); Acs.2.10 guntas in Sy.No.6O (Minj); Acs.4.1 1 guntas in Sy.No.21 (Minj) and Acs.2.OO guntas in Sy.No.22 (Minj), situated at Jampally Village, Bibinagar Mandal, Yadadri Bhongiri District, through registered sale deed bearing document No.2522 of 1978, dated 19.O9.1978. It is further stated that name of the petitioner's father was mutated in all the revenue records. It is further stated that after the death of his father, the petitioner had submitted online application, dated O4.03.2021 ar,d respondent No.4 issued proceedings ,ide File No.Bl9ll2022, dated 11.O2.2O22 recommending for mutation of the name of the petitioner in the revenue records in respect of land only to an extent of Acs.2.10 guntas in Sy.No.60 (Minj), situated at Jampally Village, Bibinagar Mandal, Yadadri Bhongiri District. The grievance of the petitioner is that the :the online apptication, dated 04.O3.2021 submitted by ' 2 CVBR,.I wp 6505_202s petitioner was rejected in respect of the remaining larrd stating that the Seller details are not found.

2. Considr:red the submissions of the learned t;ounsel for the petitioner and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposecl ol at the admission stage. In view of the nature of reiief sou-ght for in this writ petition, issuance of notice to respondent No.5 is dispensed wil h.

3. As per Section 4 of the ROR Act, 1971, the person, who acquires rights shall intimate in writing his acquisition of such right, to the Tahsildar within thirty days from the date of such acquisition. Admittedly, in this case though it is stated that the petitioner's father had purchased the property in the 5'ear 1978, no such steps have been taken for amendment oi the entries in the revenue records in consonance with Section 4 ot the ROR Act, 197I. Further, the father of the petitioner died io the year 2008 and nearly after a lapse of 13 years, the petitioner is said to have submitted online application seeking for mut.ation and consequential issuance of pattadar passbook. /, J CVBR, J Wp 6505 2025

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with the issue relating to undue delay and laches, in the case of State of Mahq.rashtra us. Digambarr, observed as under:- "A three-Judge Bench of this Court in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Shri Balwant Regular Motor Service, Amravati & Ors. [1969 (l) SCR go8l, reiterated the said principie of laches or undue delay as that which applied in exercise of power by the High Court under Article 226 of tt,.e Constitution. Therefore, where a High Court in exercise of its power vested under Article 226 of the Constitution issues a direction, order or writ for granting relief to a person including a citizen \^.ithout considering his disentitlement for such relief due to his blame-worthy conduct of undue deiay or laches in claiming the same, such a direction, order or writ becomes unsustainable as that not made judiciously ald reasonably in exercise of its sound judicia_l discretion, but as that made arbitrarily. Thus, when the writ petitioner (respondent here) was guilty of laches or undue delay in approaching the High Court, the principie of laches or undue delay adverted to above, disentitled the writ petitioner (respondent here) for discretionar5r relief under Arttcle 226 of the Constitution from the High Court, particularly, when virtually no attempt had been made by the writ petitioner to explain * his blame- worthy conduct of undue delay or laches. The Iltees; sum r scR 1 CVBR. J wp ,i505-2025 a High Court, therefore, was wholly wrong in granf ing relief in relation to inquiring into t1.e allegation ald granting compensation for his land alleged to have been user1 for scarcity relief road works in the year 197-1-72""" '"

5. [n the case ol Mrinomg Maitg rts' Chhanda Kaleg and others2, the Hon'ble Supreme Court obser-ved as t:nder: "This Court time and again has held that delay det'eats equity. Delay or laches is one of the factors which should be born in mind by the High Court while <'xercising discretionary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In a given case, the High Court ' may refuse to invoke its extraordinaqr powers if laxity on the part of the appiicalt to assert his right has allowed the cause of action to drift away and attempts are rnade subsequenfly to rekindle the lapsed cause of action" In the instant case, it is evident that the petitioner is not 6. diligent in pursuing the matter by making application seeking for .mutation and consequentiai issuance of pattadar pass books when the R.OR Act, 1971 was in force' Admittedly, the ROR Act' 1971 has been repealed and replaced by the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2O2O ' At this belated stage, if the application submitted by the petitioner is considered,itwouldnotonlycausehardshiplothepersons ' 1:02+; a sct sor, -------7 / 5 CVBR, J Wp_6505 2025 who are enjoying the subject property but would also disturb the settled possession over the said property

7. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is misconceived and the same is liable to be dismissed. It is needless to obserwe that this order does not come in the way of the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

9. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII SD/. L. VIJA LAXMI ASSISTANT RE STRAR SECTION OFFTCER j.:TiliHh13l",f s,s,t?i",8eansana,a, if;":#it,$.{rt**ieh.l s \ To 1 2 3 PSK. LS HIGH COURT DATED:0410312025 I ORDER WP.No.6505 o1f 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @c*u ftr"" Y I a. d 11 APf, zu?s (] I o€sn A rr.d