High Court · 2025

Nandhigama Srinivas Reddy, S/o Nandhigama Venkat Reddy, Aged about 45 Years, Occ. Business, Gender - Male, R!/o H. No. 2-39, Chennarum Village, Kosgi Mandal, Narayanpet Diskict 509 339. Patel alias Palle. Balavardhan Reddy, S/o Patel @ Palle. Ram Reddy, Aged. not known, Occ. PA of IVLC lvlahinder Reddy, Gender. Male, F/o Kaplapur Village, Vennached P. O., Gandweed lVlandal, Mahabubnagar District 509 337, Cell No. 9000763366 ...RESPONDENTS 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the in-action of the Respondent No. 2 to Respondent No.4 for the issuance of the Telangana State Pattedar Pass Book to the Respondent No. 5 to Respondent No. 11 even after dismissal of SA. No. 4 of 1gB0 dt. 16/10/1980 against decree in AS. No. 92 ol 1977 preferred against the Decree in OS. No. 12 of 1976 D|. 2411011977 against land in Sy. No. 1722 Situated at Kosgi Town and Mandal, Narayanpet District is an illegal, arbitrary and against Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently to set aside illegally issued Telangana State Pattedar Pass Books to the Respondent No. 5 to Respondent No.9 by the Respondent No_ 2 to Respondent No.4 even after dismissal of SA. No. 4 of 1980 dt. 16/10/1980 against decree in AS. No. 92 of 1977 preferred against the Decree in OS. No. 't2 of 1976 Dt. 24110119t7 against land in Sy. No. 1722 Situated at Kosgi Town and tMandal, Narayanpet District and consequently restore the property as it is in the Sy. No. 1722 sitauted at Kosgi and Mandal, Narayanpet District as per orders passed in vide file no CC.No. 29g3ll1 - Kdl Dt. 1811211976 by the Land Reforms Tribunal, Kodangal tilt the disposal of OS. No. 51 of 2011, pending Before Honourable District Civil Judge Narayanpet lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 stay further proceeding of the Telangana state Pattedar Pass Book illegally issued to the Respondent No.5 to Respondent No.9 by the Respondent No.2 to Respondent No. 4 even after dismissal of SA. No. 4 of 1980 dt. .16/10/1 980 against decree in AS. No. 92 of 1977 preferred against the Decree in OS. No_ 12 of 1976 DI. 2411011977 against land in Sy. No. 1122 Situated at Kosgi Town and Mandal, Narayanpet District including the on - line implementation in Dharani Portal Web Site till the disposal of this writ petition lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition unde.r 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 receive documents in the further proceedings of the writ petition Wp.no: 10059 of 2023 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. KALEKAR SUNEEL KUMAR Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 4: AGp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent NOs.5 to 9: SRl. PRAVEEN KUMAR CHALLA The Court made the following: ORDER u HON'BLE SRJ JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1OO59 of 2O23 ORDER This writ petition is fiied seeking to declare the inaction of respondent Nos.2 to 4 for issuing of the pattadar passbooks to respondent Nos.5 to 11 even after dismissal of S.A.No.4 of 1980. dated 16.10.1980 frled against A.S.No.92 of 1977 preferred against the Decree in O.S.No. 12 of 1976, dated 24.10.1970 as illegal, arbitrary and for other appropriate reliefs

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for respective parties and perused the record

3. It is stated that the Iegal heirs of Syed Bin Abdul Rahim are the olvners and possessors of lands admeasuring Ac.76.2O gts., comprising in various survey numbers, situated at Kosgi Village and Mandal, Narayanpet District. It is further stated that Syed Bin Abdul Rahim, has also filed declaration under the provisions of the Telangana Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short, 'the Act, 1973') -- -- ll \ 2 1n C.C.No.2983 /71-KDL, dated 18.12.1976 ancl after surplus land being surrendered to the Government, Sved Bin Abdul Rahim was declared as the absolute owner and possessor for the remaining retainable portion

4. Mr. Suneel Kumar Kalekar, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that taking adr,:rntage of the petitioner being the absentee pattadar, respondent Nos.5 to t have manipulated (he revenue records and obtained pattadar passbooks in respect of the subject lands. It is stated that there are disputes among the co sharers of the property and they have instituted a partrtion suit rade O.S.No.51 of 2Ol1 on the fiIe of the II Aclditional District Civil Judge, Mahabubnagar and the said suit is dccreed. It is further stated that respondent Nos.S to t have hled an application uide I.A.No.3O8 of 2024 seeking to implead them as party respondents, however, the said application was dismissed in a final decree proceedings

5. Mr. Praveen Kumar Challa, learnecl counsel appearing for respondent Nos.5 to t has vehemently contended that in fact respondent Nos.5 to t have 3 purchased the subject property under registered sale deeds from the persons whose names have been recorded in the revenue records and their predecessors in interest are the title holders of the said property. It is further stated that late Kurva Kistappa and late Basappa instituted a suit uide O.S.No. 12 of 1976 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Mahabubnagar seeking for perpetual injunction over the subject lands and the said suit attained finality by dismissal of S.A.No.O4 of 19BO by this Court on

06.10.1980.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after dismissal of S.A.No.04 of 1980, questioning the sale deeds executed in favour of respondent Nos.5 to 9, the petitioner has also instituted a suit uide O.S.No.61 of 2023 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Kosgi

7. l,earned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to t has submitted that since a comprehensive suit has already been instituted by the petitioner seeking cancellation of the alleged sale deeds, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is .- -Y-.1 \, 4 not maintainable and prayed for dismissal of the writ pe tition

8. As seen from the record, Syed Bin Abdul Rahim has hled a declaration under the provisions of the Act, 1973 in C.C.No.2983 of 1975 dated 18.12.1976 and after the surplus land being surrendered to the Government, S.ved Bin Abdul Rahim was declared as the absolute or'vner and possessor for the remaining portion. The case of respondent Nos.5 to 9 is that they have purchased the subject property under registered sale deeds from the persons whose names have been recorded in the revenue records and are disputing the nature of the sulrject Lands, its classihcation and ownership.

9. It is admitted by both the counsel that the petitioner herein has instituted a suit ulde O.S.No.6l ol 2023 seel<ing cancellation of the alleged sale deeds executed j.n favour of respondent Nos.5 to 9. Since the suit instituted is a comprehensive suit seeking cancellation of sale deeds, the petitioner IS always having right to flle appropriate application in the pending suit. Further, after finalization of the said suit a1so, the petitioner is entitled to make appropriate application for issuance of pattaclar passbooks in respect of the subject property.

10. Since the petitioner is having alternative eflicacious remedies, this Court is of the view that any orders passed by this Court in this writ petition would dehnitely have an impact over the pending suit.

11. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to hle an appropriate application in O.S.No.61 of 2023 in accordance rvilh iaw. In the event of such application being filed, the trial Court is directed to consider the same ,ald dispose of in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. SD/. //TRUE COPY// . SRINIVASA REDDY S TANT REGISTRAR To, SECTION OFFICER 1 The Principal Secretary for Revenue Department, cretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Diskict Q-ollgctor, The Office of the District Coilector, Narayanpet Town and District 509 210. J The Revenue Divisional officer, The office of the Revenue Divisional officer, Narayanpet Town and Diskict 509 210.

4. The Thahsildar, The Office of the Thahsildar, Kosgi Town and Mandal, Narayanpet District 509 339.

5. One CC to SRl. KALEKAR SUNEEL KU|\IAR Advocate tOpUCl 6. One CC to SRt. PRAVEEN KUMAR CHALLA Advocate IOPUCI 7. T-wo gCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana 0

8. Two CD Copies KKS L HIGH COURT DATED:2410212025 ORDER WP.No.10059 of 2023 _-.-, - ' i.-=:+.1^. ,l'. -"'t ';;,',i\. - .,(;\. ., '/u.-\' ' '\ 20ruBru5 \ .-: C6,- .' , ',/ O i) .,, * DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0q