The High Court · 2025

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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents in not considering the objections dated 20-03-2025 submitted by the petitioner as against online mutation application said to have been submitted by the respondents 4 and 5 in respect of the land in Sy. No. 339/AA, admeasuring ac.3-00 at Chikkapally village, Pagal Mandal, Wanaparthy District, though lA No. 49612024 to set aside ex-parte decree in O.S .No. 522t2022 is pending and further though the ex-parte decree is executable decree by filing execution petition and further though the Honourable High Court in WP No. 3050412024 directed the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the orline application of the petitioner subject to fulfills all the conditions laid down U/Serc. 7 of RoR Act, 2020, as illegal, unlawful, contrary to law and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the objection of the petitioner subnritted as against the mutation application of the respondents 4 and 5 in respect of the above land and reject the mutation application as same is not maintainable in law. lA NO: 1 OF 2Ct25 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 issue interim order directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the objections of the petitioner while considering the online application of the respondents 4 and 5 filed for implementation of ex-parte decree in OS No. 52212022 dated 14-07-2023 in respect of the in Sy. No. 339/AA, admeasuring Ac.2-00 at Chil<kapally village, Pangal fVandal, wanaparthy District in terms of the order passed by the Honorable High Court in WP No. 305O4t2024, pending disposal of main Writ Petition. Counsel for ttre Petitioner: SRI M. DAMODAR REDDY Counsel for ttre Respondent Nos.l to 3 : SRI L. RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 and 5:--- The Court made the following: ORDER I li, ' ! THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITI ON No.9832 of 2025 ORDEB This Writ Pet:tioi^ is filed seeking the following relief:- "to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandarnus declaring the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not considering the objections, dated 20.03.2025 submitted by the petitioner as against online mutation application said to have been submitted by respondent Nos.4 and 5 in respect of the land in Sy.No.339/AA admeasuring Acs.3.00 guntas, situated at Chikkapally Village, Pagal Mandal, Wanaparthy District though I.A.No.496 of 2024 to set aside tLre ex parte decree in O.S.No.522 of 2022 is pending and further though t}.:.e ex parte decree is executable decree by hling execution petition and further though the Honourable High Court in W.P.No. 30504 of 2024 directed respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the online application of the petitioner subject to fulfrls all the conditions taid do'utm under Section 7 of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O as illegal, unlawful, contrar5r to law and consequently direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the objection of the petitioner submitted as against the mutation application of respondent Nos.4 and 5 in respect of the above land and reject the mutation application as suune is not maintainable in law..."

2. Heard Sri M.Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant \ ,i. i,-{' 2 EVV, J Wp_9832_2025 Goverriment Pleader for Revenue appea-ring for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and with their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposa.l ;1t r.he admission stage. Despite vakalath being filed on behalf of respondent Nos.4 and 5, none appeared on their behalf

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the hrrsband of the petitioner by name M.Venkat Reddy was the owner and possessor of the agricultural land admeasuring Acs.2.OO guntas in S_y.No.339/AA, situated at Chikkapally Village, Pangai l\{andal, Wanaparthy District and after the death of her husband, she succeeded to the said llropertv. It is further stated that, when respondent No.4 interfered with their possession, the petitioner's husbrrnd had instituted a suit uide O.S.No.153 of 2OI2 on the fi.e of the Junior Civil Judge, I(ollapur and the said suit was clecreed on 16.06.2018. It is further stated that, in the said suit, respond.ent Nos.4 and. 5 are party defendants and suppressing the said fact, respond.ent Nos.4 and 5 have instituted anothe r suit uid.e O.S.No. 522 of 2022 on the lile of the h'incipat Junior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy .-aJ -\ .* -\ .*+ , ', I 3 EVV, j Wp_9832_2025 i and without serving summons to the petitioner they obtained an ex parte decree, dated 14.O7.2023 and basing on the said <iecree, they made online application seeking for mutation of the subject property. Pending examination of the said mutation application, respondent Nos.4 and 5, being the plaintiffs in O.S.No.522 of 2022, have filed W.P.No.30504 of 2024 without making the petitioner as party respondent and obtained an order. Learned counsel for the petitioneruvould further submit that, pending adjudication of the application under Order IX Rule 13 of C.P.C. filed by the petitioner, respondent Nos.4 and 5 have been making efforts to mutate their names in the revenue records and filed application bearing Nos.Rc24OOOO7439 and RC 24OOOO7 441 , dated 12.09 .2024 and when the same was not acted upon by the official respondents, they filed W.P.No.3O504 of 2024 without making the petitioner as party respond.ent. By an order, dated O4-I1.2O24, ttris Court disposed of the said rvrit petition and the operative portion of the order as under:- J' - -t e'a 4 q'-='+ r i1.., ' ,i',i 4 EVV, J Wp_9832_2025 " "7. [n view of the above submissions, this Court, w.thout going intc merits of the case, deems it appropriatr: to dispose of the writ petition directing the re spondent authorities to c,':amine the petitioner's online alrplicatiorr uide No.RC24OO0O7439, dated L) 09.2024 a.:rd if the said application fulfils all the conditions laid d,rr,r.m under Section 7 of the ROR Act, 2O2O, respondent a:thorities are directed to examine the sarne and pass acpropriate orders in accordance with the provisions of tlre ROR Act, 2O2O, within a period of three (O3) months fiom the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

4. .-earned counsel for the petitioner would further submil. that the petitioner has also submitted her objections, dated 20.O3.2025 through Prajavani opposing the mutation application of respondent Nos.4 and 5 stating that tlre LA. fiied by her seeking to set aside the ex parte decree for declaration and recovery of possession is pending before the civil Cotrrt. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner would seek a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the petitioner's objections, dated

20.03.2025 before considerirrg the mutation application subm:tted by the unofficial responclents basing on the ex oo" partececree... r t. t ) EW,J Wp_9832_2025

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.305O4 of 2024, the application submitted by the unofficial respondents is being taken up and the objections of the petitioners are also under consideration. He would further submit that, without considering the objections submitted by the petitioner, no action r,vould be taken by the official respondents. He r,vould, however, 1 It submit that the case of the unofficial respondents can be considered only after issuing notice to all the concerned and after granting sufficient opportunity to them including the petitioner.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and since the petitioner has aiready submitted her objections, dated 20.O3.2O25 opposing the application made by respondent Nos.4 and 5, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing respond.ent Nos,2 and 3 to consider the petitioner's \ \ I / / r ,irii:. 6 EVV, J wp_9832_2025 objection while deciding the application filed by respondent Nos.4 zrnd 5 aft.er issuing notices to all the parties and pass appropriate orclers in accordatrce w;th jaw.

7. v/ith the aborre observations, this writ petition is disposr:d of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, strall stand closed. /TRUE COPY// SD/.A.SRINIVAS REDDY ASSISTANT ylGlsrRAR (7 SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Prirrcipal secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, The state of Telangernd, HYderabad.

2. The Dis;trict collector, (Revenue) wanaparthy District, wanaparthy' 3. The Tansildar, Pangal Mandal, Wanaparthy District' 4. One CC to Sri M. Damodar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two C()s to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana' at Hyderebad [OUT]

6. Two Cr) CoPies T J/BSK k ll.,lr ' HIGH COURT DATED:1 '911112025 ORDER WP.No.9B32 of 2025 lHE S t l',J I ;r lr 1a 7n?q i * * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOU COSTS c,"R9 ' riil 'U.tr,:li; .i.,1 r , fi i;,I l,