1. Thumula Namba Rao v. State of Telangana

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 a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in removing the names of the petitioners from revenue records as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to restore the names of the petitioners as owners and possessor of the land to an extent ofAc.o-09 Gts and Ac.0-06 Gts respectively in sy. No.271 of Rangampally, Vio, Peddapally Mandal by setting aside the impugired proceedings in the No.B/3449i201 I dt. 04l 1 212O19. 7 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section .151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supoort of the petition, the High Court may be p eased to direct the respondents not to implement the proceedings in file No.8/3449/20.1g dt.0411212019 pendirg riisposal of the WP. Counsel for the Petitioners: M/S. CHINTHALAPHANI AVANI REDDy Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDy, SC FOR MUNICIPAL]TY The Court made the following: ORDER ) IION,BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8629 of 2o25 ORDER: It is stated that petitioner No.1 is the owner and ' possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.0.09 guntas and petitioner No.2 is the owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.O.O6 guntas situated in Sy No'271 of Rangampally Village, Peddapally Mandai and District, having succeeded to the same from their ancestors' It is further stated that when the disputes arose over the subject property, the petitioners and another were constrained to institute a suit for bare injuncti on uide O.S.No.1SO of 2Ol9 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Peddapally and the same is pending for adjudication. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddapally, without following due proced.ure, has arbitrarily issued - proceedings in File No.Bl3a49 12O19, dated 04.12.2019 and directed the Tahsildar' Peddapally, to record the above said land as graveyard in the pahanies.

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos'I and 2 and 2 CVBR, J Wp E629 2025 Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondenl No.3 and with their consent, this u'rit p,'tition is being dispos,:rl of at the admission stage

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has velremently contended thzLl. the land in Sy.No.27 1 is a patta land and the family graves are there in the said land and therelore, the entries are being continued in the name of the pe-itioners' predecessors -in-interest. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contr:nr1ed that the Revenue Divisional Officer without taking into consideration of the said fact, had direr:ted the Tahsildar to ,lelete the entries standing in the nam,: of the petitioners' a n c estors and record it as a burial ground that too without issuing notice to the petitioners.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Reve-rue has submitted that the iand admeasuring Ac.0.25 gu ttas in Sy.No.271 of R.angampally is utilized by the residents of Subash Nagar for burial ground for the last 40 to 50 ycars anrl as per URUP, the sru d land is recorded as a burial grou nd and therefore, tL e Revenue Divisional Officer has direc ted the Tahsildar to record as burial ground in enjoyer column. J CVBR, J Wp E629 2OZ5

5. This Court has carefully examined the orders impugned in this writ petition. The Revenue Divisional Ofhcer, Peddpaili, uide proceedings No.AlV48l2019, dated O4.12.2019' has' passed orders stating that on the application submitted by the residents of Subash Nagar, a report has been called for from the Tahsildar, who in turn submitted a report in Letter No'B- 62412019, dated 2g.1l.2llg. A careful reading of the said report would reveal that the graves are in existence in the land I lt \ in Sy.No.271 and the said land is being utilized by the resid'ents of Subash Nagar locality for the last 50 years as graveyard/ e t kabarasthan and questioning the said proceedings, the present writ petition is filed.

6. Admittedly, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddpally, issued the proceedings in the year, 2O19 and the petitioners having contested the suit pending before the civil Court, have filed the writ petition questioning the impugned proceedings' It is settled law that if the petitioners are having any right over the subject property or the graves belonging to their ancestors, they are always entitled to approach the competent civil Court seeking declaration. At this length of time, the writ petition hled by the petitioners to decide the nature and classiircation of the 4 "' ,1 CVBR,.I \Np, 8629 2025 t\ land and Iixation of boundaries under Article 2:)6 of the Constitution of India, is misconceived and accordingll , this writ petition is lirLble to be dismissed. 7 . Accorcingly, this Writ petition is dismisscd. Ther e shall be no order as to costs. 8 As a se,luel, the miscellaneous petitions pendirg, if any, shall stand c osed //TRUE COPYII SD/.L.LAKSHMI BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR i\r.\' -.- ' , SECT|oN OFFICER

1. One CC to IMis. Chinthalaphani Avani Reddy, Advocate IOPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for Revenue , High Court fo-r the State ofTelang'ana, at 3. One CC to Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, SC for Municipality[Opuc] 4. Two CD Copiesr Hyderabad [OUTI $ To, TJ LS -1'rr&;*4, HIGH COURT DATED:2110312025 ORDER WP.No.8629 of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS C*f"ei8 - q,. @ 1 HE s r47 6 ( 15 APB 2j[ z C t Dr'Srr.L ff: r't 9 t