High Court · 2025

Judgment

1. 2 J 4 The State of Telangana, Rep by its principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secrelariat, nyberdOat The Tahsildar, Dahegoan Mandal, Asifabad Komarambheem District. Anantula Laxmaiah, S/o. Narayana. aged about 70 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H. no 1-28, Sundila Vilage, Karn'anpri VfinarilF"ddapalli disi;;t.-' lgn,l?, Ramulu, S/o. Raja.Goud, a.ged about 52 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H no. 3-5713, Sundila Virrage RamJn,il M;i,Ai, b;d;r'p;iti Diiiiii ...RESPONDENTS 'cJurt

Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High miy be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularry one in-the nature of'writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the 2nd Reipondent in proposing to implement the names of the Respondents 4 and 5 in the RoR or tne airicutiurat land of the petitioners in Sy. No. 142, 143, 145,147 148 ,153, iSq,,tSA, 157,159,164, 167, 173, 175 and 172 total admeasuring Ac. 43_00 gts. , out of Ac. 60 -00 gts, situated at Gorregutta viilrage, Dahegoan Mandar, As]rabao District, without giving any notice to the petitioners anJ also without in" pending objections submitted by the petitioners, though the Respondents i"n the agreement dt. 04-04-2019, agreed to get mutate thdir names onry on ,iting "".riol,,.g' i I payment of totar sale consideration,. as iregar, unrawfur and contrary to raw and consequen'y direct the 2nd respondent to rejeci th; mutatron apprication said to have been submited by the Reslon;";i;;,;;;'l and theu_f_ariity members in respect of the above la nd lA NO: I oF 2020 Petition under Section_j ?] .,CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fited in srrpp64 of the peiitio;, in" i,gn Court may be pleased to grant interim order drrecting tt," z;i"d"rp""rirl.", to change the RoR entries of the Agricurture rand in sJ_ rvo i+z 'i;;.".,:;;'io:;148 , 1s3, 1s4.1s6,1s7.1ss .164, 167 173. 115 and tiT.total rJr""rlri"g A.. or_OO r,, . out of Ac.60 -00 gts, situated at correqutta_ Vj,lr': ^Drn-;S"rr'rfri]"0",, Asifabad District from the names of the petitioners no .l aid z t" *,i, ,"r"1'i ,hu R"rpondent no. 4 and 5 yJ'ffi I"lT;:# J5, f"'#""^ "0'' r'" *iinffi li,s io",ins pe nding objection IA NO: 10F 2024 Petition under sectton praying that in the circumstanc.es stated in the affidavit fired in support of the puiitio'", iL"'i*igh court may be pleased to condone the detav of 7.1 days in |.uirl"Lniing'ir,"'roor" tA.SR No. 67789 of 2024 in wp.No gaqt ot zozo'in ih"ilt;;rl'#;rjii:" IA NO: oF 2024 2 ,15J.,cPc Petition under Section 1S.1.,CpC gyaVing that in the circumstances stated ilJ^,:jj:::lljl5j ff;:r"rt or the p"titio,i ii.'Hish court may be prea.Jlor sRr rar,jeE;;;;;;x,[^iD1?15;:f#?se anoihe, advocarl i" in" pr,"" "r Counsel for the petitioners: SRI M. DAMODAR REDDY Counset for the Respondent Nos.i and 2: AGp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 and 4: SRI CHINNA POCHAIAH RAYAMALLA The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE'SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRI PETITION No.9841 of T

20.20. ORI)ER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government pleader lbr Revenue ald learned counsel appearing for the unorficial respondents and perused the material on record.

2. Learned counser for the petitioners submits that the present writ petition is filed by the petitioners qr""tio.rirg the action of the Respondent No.2 in proposing to implement the names of the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 in the ROR of ttie agriculturaj land of thc petitioners in Sy.Nos.t42, 143, 145, 142, t48. 153, 154, l56, 157, IS9, 164,767, tZ3, IZ5 a:iid t7Z total aclmcasuring to an extent of Ac.43-OO guntas, out of Ac.6O_OO gunras, situated at Gorregutta Villlage, Dahegoal Mandal, Asifabad District, without grvlng any notice tcr the petitioners and a.lso without considering the pending objections submitted by the petitioners though the respondents in the agreement .1.-il .) sr,J W.P.No.9a41 of 2O2O dated 04.04.2OI9, agreed to get mutate their names only making payment of total saie consideration and requested to direct the respondent No.2 to reject the mutation application said to have been submitted bv the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 and their family members 1n respect of the above land.

3. As per the contents of the writ afhdavit, the unofficia,l respondents had withheld an amount of Rs. tO Lakhs for the purpose of sare consideration and the peti tioners are ready and w'illing to get aclmeasured the rand sord to the respondent No.3 ald 4 and, also ready to deliver the physical possession of the same to them as per the Registered Sale Deeds. There is no dispute with regard to the registration of the sale deeds made by the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 in favour of the respondent Nos..3 and 4 in the document Nos.l477 /2OI9, 1482/2019, 2ZZZ /2019 and 27 7 B / 20 19, dated 04. 04 .2O 19 and, 2 l.06.2O lg respectively and as per the agreement, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 have to pay balalce amount of Rs.1O Lakhs. But, without sr(,J w.P.No.9E47 oJ 2O2O paying the said amount, they are trying to mutate the records in their favour through respondent No.2. In view of the. same, the petitioners hied the instalt writ petition.

4. On the other hand, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are denying the contention of payment of Rs.10 Lakhs and stating that they have a,lready paid said amounts and the sarne was acknowledged by the petitioner No.3 and addressed a letter to the respondent No.2 on OLO6.2;02O and also the respondents hled number of documents disputing the contention of the petitioners and the respondent Nos.3 and 4 arc disputing the contention of the petitioners with regard to the payment of the amount of 1, ', Rs.1O La-khs.

5. As per the writ alfidavit and the counter hled by the respondent Nos.3 and 4, it is clear that there is a dispute of payment of the amounts between the contesting parties and the said issue in the instant case cannot be decided by this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. It has to be decided by the competent Civil Court. , I 4

6. w.p.No.s841 "r if;l In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels on the both sides, the present writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent Nc,.2 to dispose of the application filt:cl by the petitioners before mutating the records for the suit schedule property and issue notice to the petitioners ald the unofficial respondent Nos.3 and 4 ar-rd after hearing both sides, pass appropriilte orders as per law. Ho',vever, there shall be no order as to costs.

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ P-etition shall als. stand clos-ed //TRUE COPY// sD/- v. KAVTTHA REGISTRAR qPUTY q '!itnON OFFICER

1. The Tahsildar, Dahegoan Mandal, Asifabad Komarambheem Distflct. 2. One CC to Sri M. Damodar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

4. One CC to Sri Chinna Pochaiah Rayamalla, Advocate[OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies To, TJ (r HIGH COURT DATED:2710212025 ORDER WP.No.9841 of 2020 I 6' 6'( z a 2 $ |{Afl m25 . ,,.:' \\. * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS v\