One CC to SRI v. ROHITH

Judgment

2. 3 4 5 The state of Telangana, ,"i, uy i,. Principal Secretary' Revenue Department Secretariat, HYderabad -n" **"nr" Oivisiona'i Officer' Mancherial Division' Mancherial District' The Tahsildar, Mancherial tvlandal tf*tnl-*i:ihtfu Tai,RL{15n$tT#'#'jHfr if ,;l"1'#rddvS/. 3*i['JyEl#"-11li,31h:3li,f;'l?:'#lt["fl R5 is impleaded as per C'O'dtO4/03/2025 in l'A'No'1 ol 2025' i'tfix?i""1]::i?';'f&"' ...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandarnus to declare the action of the respondent No 2 in proceeding to issue of Rithwari Patta to the Respondent no 4' instead to issue 0 R C to Petitionerwithoutconsideringtheobjections,Representationsofthepetitionerby duly issuing E Pattadar Pass Book, implementing in Dharani Web site in respect ofthelandinSy.No.26toanextentofAc.6.01Gts,situatedatMancherial Village,MancherialMandalasillegal,arbitraryunconstitutional,withoutfollowing dueprocedurecontemplatedundertheActsandvrolationofprinciplesofnatura| Justice and consequenfly direct the respondent No.1 1 in on""niweb site in respect "t";J:::::;:1rT:::;: ;"Tll:"'"ntins IA NO: 1 0F 2022 petition under section r 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in ":i""r"TJ;:"::rr.:;:::;: of the petitioner by dury web site in respect of the at Mancheriar Vi,age, the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the Hi direct the 2nd respondent not to issue of Rithwari without considering the objections, Representatior issuing E pattadarpass Book, imprempnting in or,"rl rand in sy_No . 26 to an extent of Ac.6_01 cts, sit,a lvancheriar rVrandar pending disposar of the writ Counset for the petitioner: SRt THADIKONDA KOTESHWARA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents No.1to3 : Gp FOR REVENUE counset for the Responaents'No.+ : sRl RAVI KIRAN RAo, Sr.counsel Counsel for the Respondents No.5 : SRt AVTNASH DESAI, Sr. Counsel The Court made the following: ORDER "",,,,'"1t" E{- HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V'BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PEfITION No. 1365s of2022 ORD ER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of tl:^e Constitutionoflndia,seekingthefollowingrelief: """"taering "...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one rn the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of .""porra".rt No.2 in proceeding to issue of Rithwari Patta to in-"-."*"rd""t No'4, instead to issue O'R'C' to-petitioner the objections' representations o[ the *t r.ri Book' ;;;t-u""". bv duly i""ui"g e pattadar Pass in Dharani web site in respect of the land in i;;;;;.-; Sv.No.26 to an cxtent of Ac'6'01 guntas situated at ii-r.n-"n, utr"ge, Mancherial Mandal as illegal' arbitrary ..r-r"o.t"titl-r.tio.ral,,without toilowing due procedure J".,.-rt"a"a under the Acts and violation of principles of respondent natural justice and consequently direct Nos. 1 to 3 to issue e-pattadar Pass Book implementing in Dharani Web site in respect of the land in the name of the petitioner arrd to Pass "" It is stated that the petitioner is in possession of .the. .

2. thelandtoanextentofAcs.6.OlguntasinSy.No.26 situated at Mancherial Village and Mandal' It is also stated that in the year 1955, the petitioner's grandfather wasgrantedthesaidlandasinamandSubsequently,the petitioner's father and the petitioner have succeeded to the said propert5r. The grievalce of the petitioner is that CVBR, J wp_L3655_2022 i= respondent No.4, who is the partner of a Tiles Company, in collusion with the revenue authorities got executed fa-lse and fabricate documents in his favour in respect of the said property and under the guise of the said false and fabricated documents, respondent No.2 is proceeding to mutate the name of respondent No.4 in the revenue records, instead .of issuing Occupancy Rights Certificate and e_pass book in favour of the petitioner by updating the dharani records in respect of the subject property, despite .".,&a representations/applications made by the petitiorier.

3. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record. 4. l,earned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner, being the successor-in - interest of the original inamdar, is entitred for issuance of Occupancy Rights Certihcate under the provisions of the Telangana Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 (for short, "Act of 1955") ancl the Rules madc thereun<ier. . tt,l; .,r.. ,' , ' . 3 CVBR, J Wp_13555-2022

5. Sri Ravi Kiran Rao' learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No'4 and Sri Avinash Desai' learnedSeniorCounselappearingfortheimpleaded respondent No.S, vehemently contended that' during the lifetime of the father of the petitioner' arl application has been submitted seeking for mutation of his name in the revenue records ancl consequential issuance of pass books in respect of the subject property and as he failed toenclosethedocumeiitssupportinghisclaimthathe wasthepattadarbfthesubjectproperty,thesaid application was rejected on the ground that the grandfather of the petitioner' during his lifetime' has disposed half of the property in fa"'cur of respondent No.4andremaininghalfofthepropertyinfavourof impleaded respondent No'S and alsb executed registered sale deeds in their favour' Learned Senior Counsel furthersubmittedthattlrepetitioner,onlywithamnla fide rntent;ron and to create litigation over the subject property, which has been claimed by respondent Nos'4 and 5, has frled this present writ petition suppressing &h* 4 CVBR, J Wp_13655_2022 - revenue the said facts relating to rejection of application submitted by the petitionert father for mutation in records and consequential issuance of pass books and also changing the nature of the subject property and disputing the execution of sale deeds by his grandfather in favour of respondent Nos.4 and 5 Leamed Senior Counsel also contended that since the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands, the writ petition as filed is misconceived ancl is liable to be dismissed.

6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has taken all steps to contact his client but he has not received arry rnstructions and as such he requested the Court to dispose of the writ petition basing on the records.

7. A perusal of the record rvould revea_l that the graldfather of the petitioner had disposed of the subject property in favour of respondent Nos.4 and 5. However, the said facts were not brought to the nglc-e of this 5 CVBR, J wp-13655-2022 Court '"vhile obtaining the interim orders on 2l'O3'2O22 and the petitioner is enjoying the same since last three (03) years. Since respondent Nos'4 and 5 have purchased the subject property from the grandfather of the petitioner and the application of the petitioner's father for mutation of his name in the revenue records and consequential issuance of pass books was already rejected ald the said rejection order has attained finality' the petitioner is not errtitled for any relief in the present writ Petition

8. In view of the above and since it is stated by the learnedcounselforthepetitionerthatthepetitionerisa poor farmer, who is not aware of the legal consequences and that supporting material is not readily available with him, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if a serious warning is given to the petitioner to be careful in future and if the such acts are repeated, this Court shall initiate criminal action against him. I I { 6 CVBR, J wp 73655 ZOZ2

9. Accordingly, the writ petition 1S dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY/i SD/. T. VIJAY KUMAR DEPUW REGISTRAR To, seffiorrrcen 'I . One CC to SRI THADIKONDA KOTESHWARA PRASAD, Advocate. tOpUCl 2. One CC to SRI V. ROHITH, Advocate. [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI T.P.S.HARSI-rA, Advccate. [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana

5. Two CD Copies. BSK GJP ,/ t -t HIGH COURT DATED:04 tO3t2O2S e lrlE SIA I5: o( :-) 21 AUE 206 + r: a .\, ,7 ORDER WP.No.13655 of ZO2Z DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS nAs \-/'/ /. + 2