High Court · 2025

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, directing the respondents to consider petitioner's representation dt.28.01 .2025 and conduct an enquiry and mutate petitioners names in respect of lands land in Sy.No.166/2 admeasuring Ac.0-2g gts., and in ; t i I i i :; / .1' : 1 67/4 admeasuring Ac.1 -1 6 Sy.No.167i2 adrrea i r-ing Ac.4-04 gts , and in Sy No 1 67/ll ad mea suring Ac.3-21 gts . and ir SY.No.167/5 gts., and in admeasuring A r..l-1 a gts., and in Sy No"l 68/4 admeasurirg I'c 1 - 28 gts ' and in Sy.No.17114 adrrr;as"ring Ac.0-02 gts, and in Sy No 172l'1 aclmezsuring Ac 1-2O gts., and in Sy.l'l'r' '2l5 admeasuring Ac-1-14 gts ' Total 'Adrneaturing Ac17-31 gts., situated e I Gr'e ti Village, Rebbena N/'landal' Komn'trratn B reem Asifabad District, in view or'tlrr: order dt.18.12.1gg7 passed by MR() an'j su rsequent order dl.2}.O2.2O1O p assr: 1 by the then District Collector' Counsel for thr: Petitioner: SRI DARAVATH SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondents: SRI L' RAVINDER' AGP FOR REVr:NUE The Court macle the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.67o I of 2o25 ORDER It is stated that the petitioners are the owners and possessors of the agricultural lands admeasuring Acs. 17.31 guntas in Sy.Nos.166, t6Z, 168, l7t and lZ2 ard its sub_ division numbers, situated at Goleti Village, Rebbena Mandaj, Komuram Bheem Asifabad District. It is further stated that the petitioners' grandfather by name Ajmera Devula Naik was the protected tenant of the land admeasuring Acs.29.3g guntas in Sy.No.7O (old), corresponding to new Sy.Nos.166, 167, 16g, tTl and L72 and his narne was also recorded as protected tenant as per the Tenancy Register maintained under the provisions of the Telangana Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 195O (for short "the Act"). It is further stated that after the death of the petitioners' grandfather, the name of the petitioners, father by name Dhll Nayak was recorded as protected tenant in all the revenue records. It is further stated that when the lald which is in occupation of the petitioners was forcibly taken possession by the successors of the pattadars, the father of the petitioners was constrained to file al application under Section 32 of the Act for delivery of the subject lands. It is further stated that the 2 CVBR, J 'Np r'701 2O25 TahsildrLt , i: f -,:r conducting enquiry handed ov€ r the Ix ssession of the .;a nr: ;tdmeasuring Acs.17.3 guntas to tht: pe litioners' father e r 11 : te remaining land to other protec:ed teni nts uide t is further Proceedingr \o.Al8t2/97, dated 18 12'1997 sta.ted 1,':Ia. aggrieved by the said orders, th: c lntesting responc.,3n1 . herein have filed an appeal under Siectjcn 9O of the Act bel'r -,: the Joint Collector. It is furthe:: strrted that the Joint C:,1 leltcr, Adilabad, uide order, dated 20 (]2- 20 lr) in Case No.D4/l',\/.li 1s98, dismissed the appeal anl c'rniir med the order, ([ar-e 1 18.12.1997 passed by the Tahsild:'r tLnde r Section 32 of thr.: 1(t and the said order has 2116inr:d lin;r1ity. The gri.evanlr: r:i'.he petitioners is that even after |'nalizaticn of the proceecllng : ssued by the Tahsildar under S rrctirn ]2 of the Act, th': res condents are neither granted the r;erl ii-rr:i te under Section il,S l) of the Act nor mutate the names of the p stitioners by grarLLinir l'outhi lzaJa and consequential issr tanr;e I pattadar passbo:,1,: r.rtler the provisions of the Telangarrir RigLLt; in Land and Pzrttarl r: Passbooks Act, 2O2O (for short "lhe Act 9 of 2O2O").

2. Oonr i lered the submissions of the 1.61n,:,1 c run ;e1 for the petitiorre rs and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Gc vernment J CVBR, J Wp_6701 2025 Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.l to 4 and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed at the admission stage.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that since the respondents are not mutating the names of the petitioners and non_issuance of pattadar pass book, the petitioners are not in a position to enjoy their absolute rights over the subject property and also unable to receive various incentives sanctioned by the Government as investment subsidies.

4. Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue, has not disputed the orders passed by the Tahsildar under Section 32 of the Act and also not disputed that the said order has attained finality by dismissal of the appeal by the Joint Collector. I-earned Assistant Government pleader further submitted that as the petitioners have not taken steps under the provisions of the Act before the appropriate authorit5r for issuance of the certifrcate under Section 3g-E of the Act i.e., ownership certificate, the petitioners are not entitled for mutation and consequential issualce of pattadar passbooks as per the provisions of thd Act 9 of 2O2O. 4 CVBR, J \Yp {701,2025 I Tlte:rer :s no dispute that the petitioners' g::ilnclfalrt er name 5. y72" 5sr;3,'-d,: ( as protected tenant in the rever Lle :'eco 'ds ajter his death. Jrcssession of the subject land was heLtlded or er to the petition,l ri' e ther by the Tahsildar uide pro':ee Cing s, dated

18.12.1,r")7 u'hich order attained finality by the dismisr;al of the appealrrv 1t: Joint Collector. Further, as seel- from tlre record the petitio:r:rs have not made any applicttlior lrlLder the provisicns r,i the Act recognizing their terrancy r ghts by grantinlr ,rv t L,:rshiP certificate under Section 3ii'E of lL e Act' It is settl€ cl 1i: r ' that as per the judgment of the F tt11 l]etr' :h of this Court i'r Stla a. Tahsildqr, lJtnoorl there is ro lirrLr 'ation for making ar application for the protected t':na rts or their successors tr-interest either for recognizing their rlglts under the prcvisi,r ts of the Act or for consequential mura'ti'rn in the revenuo vsco'ds. Therefore, this Court deems t apprr)priate to dispose r;,f lr s writ petition, leaving it open to -he pe:i ioners to make appr r rriate application under the provisic'ns of t re Act for issuanr:e o crvnership cerlificate under Sectio;t 3Ei-E of the Act and on s.rr,: lL application being submitted by tLLe pt:litir 'ners and the sarrLtr i,. :omplied with all the requiremenl-s o[ th': Act and the petitiolrrr-s are entitled for issuance of the liam'3, re spondent ' to8; i:1 ,rt.t ; o rs 5 CVBR, J Wp_6701 202s No.3-the Revenue Divisional Officer, is directed to examine the said .application strictly in terms of the Act and the Rules made therein and pass appropriate orders. In any event, if the petitioners are not entitled for issuance of certiJicate under Section 38-E of the Act, respondent No.3 is directed to pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioners within a period of two (O2) months from the date of receipt of such application.

6. With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 7 As a sequel, the miscellaleous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed sD/- P.Ch NAGABHUSHAIi46A D PUry REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER 'l . The Principal Secreta ry, Revenue Departm Secretariat, B RKR Bhavan, Hyderabad, Telangan The District Collector, Kommuram Bheem Asifabad District, Telangana 00063 a State of Telangana, 2 3. The Revenue Divisional Telangana. Officer, Kommuram Bheem Asifabad District,

4. The Tahsirdar, Rebbena Mandar and Kommuram Bheem Asifabad District, Telangana.

5. One CC to SRt DARAVATH SUDHAKAR, Advocate tOpUCl 6 Tryg ccs to sRr L. RAVTNDER, AGp for REVENUE, High court for the state 7. fwo CD Copies of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

3.i' k HIGH GOURT DATE D:05/03/2025 y'; '( 5(IrtES 14rA i,t \, /,4: 's' o _) t- t'+ \r \ [ 7 JUt 2025 z C)\ rt- ''i. * r: \'ii,i1 ORDER WP No.6i'01 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THF. WRIt PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o-N coYr*o \o Sue