✦ High Court of India · 10 Mar 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 10 Mar 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
10 Mar 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,501 words

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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.3 to 5 in non-considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 05.08.2024 and non- initiating to cancel succession mutation of the Respondent No.6 who obtained the mutation on the land of the Petitioner to an extent of Ac.1.26 Gts in Survey No.938/Rul which is situated at Gaddamvari Yedavally Village, Kanagal Mandal, I I I I Nalgonda Distr r;t i ,; i legal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violatior I of Articles 14, 15,21 and 300-,rr cf [:onstitution of lndia and also violation of Drinr.iples of Natural Justice and c(,.sr)cuently direct the Respondent Nos.3 to ti t: consider the representation rf tf ( Petitioner dated 05-08.2024 and carcel the illegal mutation proceedings and c;rrrr;el the illegal E-Pattadar Passbook of tlre Rcspondent No.6 on her land to itn r,,x.ent of Ac.1 .26 Gts in Survey No.938/llul whir,h is situated at Gaddamvari Yedar,;: l'i ',,/illage, Kanagal [VIandal, Nalgonda Distr ct and mutate her name in all revc ttttr. 'e cords and issue the E-Pattadar Passboo< to he Petitioner. |.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition IJndr:,r']Section'151 CPC praying that in the r;ircuntstences stated in the affidavit fileri in s roport of the petition, the High Court n ay ce p eased to direct the Responden \.,lc,s :i to 5 to consider the representation of th,: [)etitioner dated 05.08.2024 and r;arr Cl the illegal mutation proceedings arrd carc >l the illegal E- Pattadar Passb:r:k c f the Respondent No.6 on her land t: ar ex:ent of Ac..l .26 Gts in Survey No I )8/Rul which is situated at Gaddamvari ./erlavally Village, Kanagal Mandal, Nla gonda District and mutate her name in ;rll re venue records and issue the E-Pzrtt:Car Passbook to the Petitioner pending dispr;sal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 5:AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : - The Court at ther stag e of admission made the following ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C,V.BHASI{AR REDDY UIRIT PETITION No.7228 of 2o25 ORDER: 'lhis writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.3 lo 5 in not considering the representation of the pe[itioner dated 05.08.2O24 and not initiating to cancel succession mutation of respondent No.6, who obtained the mutation on the land of the petitioner to an exLent ol Ac. 1.26 gts., in Sy.No-938/Rul, situated at Gaddamvari Yedavally Village, Kanagal Mandal, Nalgonda District, as illegal, arbitrary and lor other appropriate reliefs.

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the pctitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.I to 5 and with their consent this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

3. It is stated that the petitioner's grandfather was Lhe pattadar and possessor of the agricultural land to an extent of Ac. 1.26 gts., in Sy.No.938/Ru 1, situated at Gaddamvari Yedavatly Village, Kanagal Mandal, Nalgonda District and the revenue authorities had mutated his name in all the revenue records and also issued pattadar passbook and title deed. It is further stated that during the lifetime of the petitioner's grandfather, he cultivated the said / ,r' 2 CVBR. J W t 1228 2025 land ar: i''d intestate in the year 1990. ^'1- r:r:zLiter, the pelitione r'l rg irndmother cultivaled the said lancl :rLr I dr,:c intestate in the 1':;r 1995. FurLher, after the death rf hc petilioner's grandmorlrr r petitioner's mother and her sisLers; r:L.rltivated the saic.l larr , .. r r, l all died, consequent to which, the Pr t it oner along rvith her :;i:. ,; lnherited the rights of the said land a rd cuLtivating the sam,:. I'l r.' i::rse of the petitioner is that resl)orr,1,:111 No.5, with an ill in-:"'r i() r to grab her land has made an onjire application uide No. t-l.li 0O 1S608 for mutation of his na:rte r t tc rcvenue records, iLr:ri ,rrting upon the same, the responde nl rrrthorities, rcl-v-ing lrlrorL :r 'abricated sale deed bearing dor:untr:nt No.1601 of 2013, hrr:.; irrt:rted the name of respondent N,:.6 ir L1e revenue records . -r' :is:cd e-pattadar passbook in reslrect of he subject propertv. 'i l'e glrievancc of the petitioner is theL- cr e r hough shc made a r cl )r t:ir ntation dated 05.08.2024 beforc t hcr -espondent authorir,'ci, r c uesting to cancel the illegal mutaltor ard e-pattadar passbool(:j s sur:d in favour of respondent No.tr, r hr: -cspondent authoriLic-. 'l Lr1 not consider the same. Hence, tl're p'escnt writ pc Lition.

4. Mr . F r: rclu Bhaskar, learned counsel for th,3 pet itioner has vehemcni.'./ :')nrcnded that the respondent autl.oriri(rs, instead of conductinrl r, t:lLlrr-y as per the provisions of the Tr: angtt-ra Rights ri; I r;i'l 3 CVtsR, J wp 7228 202s in Land and Pattadar passbooks Act, 2O2O, have mutated the name of respondent No.6, that too, without issuing any notice to the affected/ in terested persons and without lbllowing the guidelines issued by the Full Bench of this court in the case of Chinnann Pandurangam o, Mandal Reraenue OfJicer, seritingampatlg Mandar and otherst . Thererbre, learned counscl prays [or cancellation of the mutation and e_pattadar passbook issued in favour of respondent No.6.

5. I-carned Assistant Government pleacler for Revenue appearing for respondcnt Nos_ 1 to 5 lras submifted that the mutation has been affccted in the name of responclent No.6 basing on the registered sale deed bearing document No.1601 of 2013 and consequently issucd e pattadar passbook and title deed in respect o[ thc subJe(]t property Learned Assistant Government pleader furthcr submitted that if the petitioner aggrieved with the registered sale deed relied upon by responclent No.6 and consequential mulaLion of the name of respondent No.6 in respcct of thc subject property, he has to approach the competent crvil Court seeking to declare him as the pattadar. 1S

6. In vieu, of the above, since there are serious disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.6 with regard to the ' etR zooS ep t5 I / 4 CVBR, J \\ p 7228 2025 .L ti k over the subject property, l.his C >urt. while entcrLal , L.rt' u,rit petition, in a summary iurisdi,:tior, is not in a position r ).arnine the saie deed bearing dorrumert No.1601 of 2013 rr: ,:r L L :ron by respondenl No.6 and its ge rrr.ri rity. Therefore, if the pr i , r'r is aggrieved with the said sale rli:e:: :-e1 ed r-Lpon by respond('r'rL I o.6 and consequential muLatior o' rhe name oI respondo'u \o6 in respect of the subject propery, he has to approaclr t'( c()mpetent Civil Court by institutir g ra corrprehensive surt scr i<ir i1 o rleclare him as the paLtaclar irld a lLc r obtaining orders l'., r lrr: compctent Civil Court, the peLitlJne r is a-, liberly to make a[)p1 ('] rriirte application seeking correcti,)n o' lhe revenue records . lrl r:onsequential issuance of the pai..rr1:'r pirssbrroks in respect :,'r'l ) sllbject property in accordance witl-r lin,'.

7. Wrilr rr r rtbovc observations, this Writ Pet.itic,rr is lisposed of Thcrc slrzrll t r no order as to costs Ar; r : t qLrel, the miscellaneous petitions pe ndrrrg, il any, shall sl.zLncl c [,',sed //TRUE COPY// I SD/-T TIRUMALA DEVI DEPUTY REGISTRAR ,t SECflON OFFICER - Hyderabad riat Elui ding, '1. The Prinr,ipal S;ecretary, Revenue Department, S Secretari.:l, Si t, rre of Telangana at Hyderabad 2. The Chie" Ccr r missioner of Land Administration (CCLi\ 3. The Districl C r lector, Nalgonda, Naglonda District. 4. lhe Revenue [) visionar.officer, Miruyargu.ra Division, Nargc,ncra District. 5. The T-atrs tda,., (anagat Mandat, NatgbnEi Oirlri"i- ti two ccs to oF' FoR REVENUE, High court for the stater of r.rrangana at I 9n" CC t) SFI RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CD C)op er; w Hyderabad [r) JTI ), Telarrgana, To SA R,q ) I €r I: fi ii[] !i ( ,( a :) o HIGH COURT DATED:10103,'2025 ORDER WP.No.7228 of 2025 DISPOSING CIF THE W.P AT THE STAC;E OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS. '.1..$a\a-W

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments