Parandha Rangamma v. The State of Telangana

.10. Manda Sunitha, Wo. Srinivasa Rao, Aged about 49 Years, Occ. Household, R/o. H.No.4-4911, Ganguru, Penamalooru Mandal, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh State 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 .,.RESPONDENTS pleased to issue a writ. order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, decraring the action of the Respondent No.4/Tahsildar. in not issuing pattedar pass books in the name of petiiioner in respect of her land admeasuring Ac'1-03 guntas in Sy. Nos,190, 191, Ac.1-03 Gts situated at chillapuram village, Narayanapur Mandal, yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District (Erstwhile- Nalgonda District) but issuing pattedar pass book in favou-r of respondent no.7 fraudulently and .intentionally in respect of petitioner s land admeasuring Ac. 1_03 guntas in Sy. Nos.190, .1 91, Ac 1-03 Gts situated at Chillapuram- Village, Narayanapur Mandat, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District as arbitrary, illegil, unconstitutional and vrolative of Article '14 of the constitution of lndia. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section j 51 CpC praying that in tbe circumstances Stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be ple3sed to direct the Jolrtt respondent/Tahsildar forthwith tg consider th'e application dated 1210812024 of the petitioner and further direcl Respondent No,4/fahsildar to issue pattedar pass books in the name of petitioner in r6spect of her land pdmeasuring Ac.1-03 guntas in Sy Nos 190, 191, Ac.'l-03 Gts situated a! Chillapuram Viilage, Narayanapur Mandal, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District (Erstwhilg- Nalgonda Distript), pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsgl for the Petitioner: SRl. ENAMALLA NAGARAJU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: Gp FOR BEVENUE Counsel for the Respondent NO.5l Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to i0: .-- The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9728 of 2O2S ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondent No.4 in not issuing pattadar passbooks in the name of the petitioner in respect of the land admeasuring Ac. 1.03 guntas in Sy.Nos. 190 and 191, situated at Chillapuram Village, Narayanapur Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District and issuing pattadar passbook in favour of respondent No.7 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently, prayed for other appropriate reliefs.

2. It is stated that the husband of the petitioner by name Parandha Yadaiah had purchased the land admeasuring Ac.1.01 guntas in Sy.No.t90 and Ac.0.O2 guntas in Sy.No.191, situated at Chillapur Village, Narayanapur Mandal, yadadri- Bhongir District, through registered sale deed bearing document N.1920 f 2013, dated 22.04.2O13. It is further stated thar the vendor of the petitioner's husband had purchased the said property through Agreement of Sale-cum-General power of Attorney No. 1342 of 2OiO, dated 16-07.2O1O. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities, without issuing \'.j\ -I \ 2 CVBR, J \\'p 9728 2025 any notice to the petitioner, have entertained the sale deeds in favour of respondent No'7 and the name of respondent No'7 has been mutated in the revenue records'

3. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and with their consent' this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage ' In view of the nature of relief sought for in this writ petition' issuance of notice to the unofhciai respondent is dispensed with' Learned counsel for the petitioner has not placed any 4. record to satisfy this Court that after purchasing the property through registered sale deed bearing document No'192O of of the petitioner's husband was mr'.rtated in the 20 13, the name as per Section 4 of the Telangana Rights in revenue records LandandPattadarPassbooksAct,lg7l(forshortthe"RoRAct, 1971") and the Rules made thereunder' It is apt to refer to Section 4 of the ROR Act, 1971 ' which reads as under:- "section 4 " Any person acquiring by successron' survivorship, inheritance, partition' Government patta, decree of a court or otherwise any right as' owner, pattadar of a land and any person acquiring any right as occupant of a land by any other method shail intimate in writing his acquisition of such J CVBR. J Wp 9728 202-5 right, to the Tahsildar within thirty days from the date of such acquisition. The Village Revenue Officer on noting the acquisition of rights in his jurisdiction shall intimate the Tahsildar within one (i) day as prescribed. The Tahsildar shall' give or send a written acknowledgement of the receipt of such intimation to the person making it."

5. Section 4 of the ROR Act, 1971 specifically states that if any person acquiring by succession, survivorship, inheritance, partition, Government patta, decree of a court or otherwise'any right as, owner, pattadar of a land has to make an application within thirty days from the date of such acquisition.

6. ln Mohan Pandeg as. Usha Rani Rajgaric, the Hon'ble Suprgae Court observed as follows: "6: xxxx.-.-. It has repeatedlg been held bA this Court as also by uaious High Courts that a regular suit is the appropiate remedy for settlement of disputes relating to propertA ights betueen piuate persons and that the rernedg under Article 226 of the Constitution shqll not be auqtlable except LUhere uiolation of some statutory dutg on the pert of a statutory authoritA is alleged. And in such a cqse, the Court u.till issue appropiate direction to the authoitg concemed. If the real gieuance of the respondent i.s agaiftst the initiation of ciminal proceedings, and the orders passed and steps token thereon, she must auail of the remedA t(1994 4 SCC 61 -EVr \. \j I CVBR, J Wp_9728 2025 under the general taw including the Ciminal Procedure Code' The Higtt. Courl cannot allotu the constituttonal jurisdictiort to be used. for de-ciding disputes, for uthich remedies' under the general laut. ciuil or ciminql, are auailab[e- It is noi intended to replace the ordina4l remedles by wag of a suit or application auailable to a litiga .t. The juisdictiort is speciaL and ertraordinary and should not be exercised casua1ty or tightty " (emphasis supptted| 7. ln Dwdrka Prasad Agdrual a' B'D' Agarwal2 ' the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as follows: "The High Court uthile exercising a pouer of iudtcial reuiertt ts concenledulithitlegalitg'ilT{ltionalitaandprocedurolimpropietg of an order passed bA the State or a stotutory authoritg' Remedg under ArticLe 226 of the Constitution o'f India cannot be inuoked Jor risolution of a piuote Laut dispute qs contra distirtguished from a d.ispute inuoluing public tau chqrocter' It is also well Settledthatautitremedgisnotauailableforresotutionofq ProPertll or a title disPute " In the instant case, admittedly' the name of the 8. petitioner's husband was not mutated in the revenue records and questioning the subsequent sale deeds executed in favour of respondent No.7, the present writ petition is fi1ed' If the petitioner is having any right or title over the subject property under registered saie deed, she has to approach the competent civil Court seeking lor declaration' Therefore' this Court is of ,2(2003) 6 SCC 23O 5 CVBR, J wp 9728 2025 the opinion that the writ petition filed is misconceived and the same is liable to be dismissed. However, it is neediess to observe that, if the petitioner is having any right, she is at liberty to avail the remedies before the competent civil Court.

9. Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 0 1 As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII SD/-P. PADMANABHA REDDY EPUry REGISTRAR I SECTION OFFICER

1. One CC to SRI ENAI/ALLA NAGARAJU Advocate tOpUCl 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana.

3. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTI Two CD Copies To, \ 4 KKS BS b HIGH COURI" DATED:01 10412025 ORDER WP.No.9728 af 2025 EH s 1 14 7 o r) 1 6 PA R 206 ($ l' t) .u ,-ca€ DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS G)c'6r*lW