The High Court · 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 vacate the interim order daled 201412021 passed in l.A No 112021 in W. P No. 1027112021 and dismiss the above Writ Petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V.SEETHARAMA AVADHANI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 5: GP FOR REVENUE Gounsel for the Respondent Nos.6, 8 TO 10: SRI ASHOK REDDY KANATHALA Counsel for the Respondent No.7: - The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.1O271 of 2O2l ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the order passed respondent No.2 in New Case No.F3/Spl.Tribunal/Cheriall Ol3 l2O2l dated 03.O2.2021 as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Ashok Reddy Kanatha-la, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.6,8 to 10.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of petitioner and his brother have sold the joint family property admeasuring to an extent of Ac.13.13 gts in different survey numbers situated at Nagapuri Village, Cherial Mandal, Warangal District, to others under various sale deeds without notice and knowledge of the petitioner and the names of the purchasers were incorporated in the revenue records illega1ly. The petitioner and others have 2 SK, J WP No.lO271 of 202 1 filed suit in O.S.No.4 of 2OO7 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Jangoan, for partition and declaration. Thereafter, the matter was settled before the Lok Adalat and preliminarl. decree was passed in LAC No.213 of 2013 dated 23.11.2013 and subsequently a linal decree was also passed on 25.07.2015. On the basis of fintri decree, the petitioner has applied before the Tahsildar to effect mutatiorl in the revenue records arrd to grant pattadar passbooks and title deeds for his share of land. Thereafter, I he lrled W.P.Nos.551O of 2016 and W.P.No.39830 of 2016 arrd as per the directions of this Court, the respondent No.S-Tahsildar has passed order dated 09.08.2016 directing mutation of the records incorporating the name of petitioner in t1-re place of the respondent Nos.6 to 10. In the meantime, the respondent Nos.6 to 10 have filed I.A.No.214 of 2016 before the Civil Court to set aside the linal decree granted by the Lok Adalat on the ground that they were not served with notice and the same was allowed by setting aside the final decree dated 25.O7.2015 vide order dated 28.O7.2017. Against the said order, the petitioner \ 3 SK, J WP No. 10271 of 2021 filed C.R.P.No.33O6 of 2018 and the same was dismissed on ,

03.o4.2019.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that challenging the order of the Tahsildar dated 09.08.2016, the respondent Nos.6 to 10 filed appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer and the sarrre was dismissed on 30.08.2018. Against the said order, the respondent Nos.6 to 1O filed revision before the respondent No.3-Joint Collector, Siddipet, which was transferred to the Special Tribunal and the same was allowed by the impugned order on O3.O2.2O21. He submits that the Special Tribunal failed to follow the rules as contemplated under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, 2O2O for mutation of the names and passed order without recording any findings and if any order passed by the Civit Court in respect of the final decree, the respondents shall approach the Tahsildar under Section 7 of the Act, 2O2O. He further submits that the impugned order is a non-speaking order passed by the Special .1 SK, J WP No 10271 of 2021 Tribuna-l n'lthout jurisdiction and requested to allow the writ petition by setting aside the impugned order

5. Learncd Counsel for the respondent Nos.6,8 to 10 based on thc counter submits thal as the final decree passed by the Lok Adalat was set aside by order dated 28.07.2017 rn I.A.No.214 of 2016 in I.A.No.529 of 20 15 in O.S.No.4 of 2OO7 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon, ancl the same was also confirmed by this Court in C.R.P.No.3llo6 of 2018 dated 03.04.2079, the petitionerhas no right to ciaim any right or title till the fina1 decree is passed by the Civil Court and the Special Tribunal has rightly allowcd the revision by the impugned order and there is no need to interlere rr',ith by this Court and requested to dismiss the writ petition

6. After hearing both sides and perusa,l of the record, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner and others filed suit in O.S.No.4 of 2OO7 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon, against the respondent Nos.6 to 10 ald others lor partition and declaration and the same was 5 SK, J WP No.10271 of 2O2l referred to Lok Adalat, wherein preliminary decree was passed in LAC No.2i3 of 20 13 dated 23. i 1.20 l3.Thereafter, a final decree was passed on 25.07.2OI5. Challenging the said linal decree, the respondent Nos.6 to 1O liled LA.No.214 of 2016 in I.A.No.529 of 2Ol5 in O.S.No.4 of 2OO7 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon, and the sarne was allowed on 28.07.2017 by setting aside the fina-l decree on the ground that no notice was served on the petitioners i.e., respondent Nos.6 to 10 herein, in the linal decree petition in I.A.No.529 of 2015 and the drafting of the Iinal decree is not in terms of the preliminary decree. The said order was also confirmed by this Court 1n C.R.P. No.3306 of 2018 dated 03.04.2019.

7. The mutation proceedings have taken place in favour of the petitioner basing on the final decree passed 1n O.S.No.4 of 2OO7 on the lile of the Senior Civil Judge, Janagaon dated 25.07.2015 and thereafter, the petitoner has approached this Court and filed W.P.No.SS10 of 20 16 and W.P.No.3983O ol 2016 and the sarne were disposed of I I I I I () SK, J WP No.10271 of 2021 directing the Tahsildar to mutate the revenue records as per the final decree passed in O.S.No.4 of 2OO7 . After passing ol' the said decree, the unofficial respondents herein filed I.A.No.2l4 ol 2016 rn I.A.No.529 of 20 15 in O.S.No.4 of 2OO7 and the same was ordered by setting aside the final decree in O.S.No.4 of 2OO7. In view ol the same, there is no basis for granting mutatioll in favour of the writ petitioner bv the Tahsildar.

8. In thc earlier round of litigation, the petitioner has approachecl this Court and obtained orders stating that the competenl Civil Court has passed the final decree proceedings and this Court also directed the rt:spondents to mutate the name of the petitioner herein. After mutation of the records, the unolhcial respondents have approached the revenue authorities by liling appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer and thereafter, revision petition and the same was transferred to the Special Tribunal. The Special Tribuna-l has rightly allowed the revision petition by setting aside the nrutation proceedings in favour of the petitioner ,l ( 7 SK, J WP No. 10271 of 2021 on the ground that the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.4 of 20O7 was set aside and the sarne was conlirmed by this Court in C.R.P.No.3306 of 2018 dated 03.04.2019' The Special Tribunal has allowed the revisign petition filed by the unoflicial respondents ald there is no valid ground to interfere with the same as the petitioner has failed to obtain I , any lavorable orders from the competent Civil Court as on this date for mutation of records in his favour. If the petitioner has succeeded in the partition and declaration suit, he can approach the revenue authorities for mutation of the records basing on the Judgment and Decree. Till obtaining the valid Judgment and Decree in favour of the petitioner, the respondents cannot continue the mutation granted in favour of the petitioner without any basis' In view of the above circumstances, there are no 9. merits in the present writ petition to set aside the impugned proceedings and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of the Special Tribunal and the writ petition is liabie to be dismissed. 8 SK, J WP lJo. 1027 I of 202 1

10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

11. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition sha1l stand closed. SD/. P. PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER I //TRUE COPY// To I 2 J 4 PSK. One CC to SRI V.SEETHARAMAAVADHANI, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI ASHOK REDDY KANATHALA, Advocate-[OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State-of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:01 10512025 ORDER I W.P.No.10271 oI 2021 i, :!j ,.) i) .i .9 -\r$ (5 P * .J ^t- , DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @ t6