✦ High Court of India · 08 Apr 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 08 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
08 Apr 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,089 words

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 pteased to issue any appropriate writ, order, or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, to set aside the Notice bearing No.B171112024 daled 27.03.2025 issued by Respondent No.4 as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct Respondent No.2 to consider the Petitioner's complaint dated 1 1.11.2024 in accordance with the ordersofthisHon.bleHighCourtpassedinW.P.No.T025of2025dated 07.o3.2025, by taking into account the Petitioners representation dated 28.O3.2025. I ,/ lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 suspend the Notice vide No.8.171112024 Dated- 27.03.2O25 issued by Respondent No-4 pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petrtioner: SRI BHARGAVAKRISHNA.L Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER / ^'! / HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1O51L of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to set aside the notice bearing No.B/71112024, dated 27.03.2025 issued by respondent No.4, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and lor other appropriate reliefs.

2. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner and possessor ol agricultural land to an extent of Ac.O.20 guntas 1n Sy.No.54/4/Ln3l2, situated at Malkapahad Village, Jilled Chowdergudem Mandal, Rangareddy District, having purchased the same through the registered sale deed bearing document No.1396 of 2023, dated

13.08.2023. It is further stated that the name of peititoner is reflected in all the revenue records as pattadar and the re\renue authorities also issued pattadar passbook bearing No.T05O5O 14O407 uide Khata No.60304 under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O. It is further stated that due to Iinancial constraints the petitioner intended to sell the 2 subject property ald when the document was presented for registration, the same was refused by respondentNo.4 uid.e endorsement No.B/711/2024, dated 02. lI.2024 on the ground that the subject land of the petitioner was classilied as 'sarkari poramboke,. It is stated that after receipt of the refusal order, the petitioner has submitted complaint dated 11.11.2024 on the file of respondent Nos.2 and 3 stating that out of the total extent of Acs.5O.OO guntas in Sy.No.S4, an extent of Acs.29.32 guntas was recorded as 'sarkari poramboke, and the of said survey number is remalnlng extent forming part classilied as patta land and requested to receive and register the document. It is further stzrt.ed that even after the said clarification, when the respondents have not entertained the document, the petitioner was constrained to institute W.p.No.7025 of 2025 and this Court disposed of the said wrjt petition directing the respondent authorities to examine the case of the petitioner in terms of the complaint dated rr.11.2o24 and pass appropriate orders. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent_Tahsildar having received and registerecl the documents on the very sarne property \ / I 3 earlier, is refusing to register the document on one pretext or other on the ground that the nature of land is classified as'Sarkari Poramboke'.

3. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and with their consent this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

4. The case of the petitioner is that the Tahsildar, who entertained registrations earlier on the very subject land forming part of Sy.No.54, has refused to register the document presented by him without assigning any valid reasons and the said action amounts to bias and contrary to the provisions of the ROR Act and aiso in gross violation of principles of natural justice. It is the specific case of the petitioner that he has submitted a complaint dated 11 .11 .2024 on the fiie of respondent Nos.3 and 4 on the discriminative action of the respondent-Tahsildar entertaining the registrations in respect of part of the lands in very same subject survey number and refusing to register the documents presented by the petitioner. I

5. This Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to dispose ol the writ petition directing respondent No.2-District coirector to examine the complaint dated 11.11.2024 submitted by the petitioner and if the property claimed by the petitioner was not forming part of .sarkari poramboke land, a,d if the Government interest is not involved over the subject property, the respondent No.2 shall direct the Tahsildar to entertain the document submitted by the petitioner for registration and consequential mutation of the subject property in the revenue records, in accordalce with law. In any event, if the petitioner,s documents have not complied with the requirements of lau,, appropriate reasoned orders shall be passed, in accordance with law and the same sha_ll be communicated to the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above observations, this writ petition disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. IS 5 As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Se of Telangana. SD/-V. KAVITHA EPUTY REGIS TION OFFI GER \ riat, Hyderabad, State

2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State' 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, shadnagar Division, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State.

4. The Tahsildar/Joint Sub Registrar, Jilled Chowdergudem Mandal' Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State.

5. One CC to SRI BHARGAVAKRISHNA L, Advocate [OPUCI 6.TwoCCstoGPFORREVENUE,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad [OUT]

7. Two CD CoPies BSR BS N. HIGH COURT DATED:0810412025 t{ E TS A r ( )3 27 !iA\ 2S6 z .L t) I sPAl c\r ORDER WP.No.10511 of 2025 I I I I I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS %6, €

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments