✦ Telangana High Court

Sakinam Bhushamma v. The State of Telangana

C V BHASKAR REDDY4 min read

Case at a glance

Bench
C V BHASKAR REDDY

Outcome

Disposed of

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of

Key paragraphs

  • Para 55. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Judgment

Cause title

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 in the nature of. Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not disposing the representations/appears dr.o7.11.2020, or.11.2022 and wrongry dereting an extent of 0.40 cents as against the total extent of 0.g2 cents in sy.no.7/7 against katha no.l47 in new pattadar passbook bearing no. T211'10030067 situated at seethanagaram Revenue vilage, Dummugudem Mandar of Bhadradri Kothagudem District and not rectifying the said mistake committed is illegar, arbitary and violates the provisions of old and new pattadar passbooks act and in violation of Article 21 and 3oo(A) of the constitution of lndia and consequenfly I i direct the RDO to forthwith consider and pass orders on . appeal/representations filed by the petitioner ./' IA NO: 10F 2025 Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in th.e circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue an interim direction directing the 3rd respondent RDO, Dummugudem for disposing the appeal filed dt.07.11.2022 &.07.11.2020 for showing total extent of 0.82,centsinSy.No.7/TagainstKathano.l4Tinpattadarpassbookbearing no.T271 10030067 situated al Seethanagaram Revenue village, Dummugudem Mandal of Bhadradri Kothagudem District pending disposal of the above writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI P.V.RAMANA Counsel for the Respondents No.1to3 : ASST. GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the ResPondents No.4 : The Court made the following: ORDER l' THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1125L of 2025

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed declaring the action of respondent No.3 in not disposing of the representations/ appeals, dated 07.11.2O2O and 07.11.2022 hled by the petitioner for making entries in respect of the remaining land to an extent of Ac.O.4O cents in Sy.No.7/7 of Seethanagaram Village, Dummugudem Mandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of .ra'iri'.al justice and consequently, prayed for other appropriate reliefi.

2.

It is stated that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of the land to an extent of Ac.O.82 guntas in Sy.No.7/7 of Seethanagaram Village, Dummugudem Mandal, Bhadradri- Kothagudem District, having acquired the same from her ancestors and her name was incorporated as pattadar in all the revenue records and pattadar passbook was also issued in her favour under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O (for short "the Act 9 of 2O2O"l. It is further stated that while issuing e-pattadar passbook bearing No.T27110030067, the land to an extent of Ac.O.42 cents was entered in her name and the remaining irr- 1 2 CVBR, J wp ll25t _2025 extent of Ac.0.40 cents was entered in the name of pandru Satyavathi-respondent No.5 and as such, she made representations/ appeals, dated 07.1 l.2O2O and 07.1 1.2022 seeking for data correction. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after receipt of the said representations/ appeals, the respondent authorities did not consider the same.

3.

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.l to 4 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 unoflicial respondent is dispensed with.

4.

. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for,,.rthe respective parties and as it is stated that the ropr.esentatioirs/ appeals, dated 07. ll.2O2O and 07. 1 1.2022 submitted by the petitioners are pending before respondent No.3 for the last two and half years, this Court, without expresslng any oplnlon on the merits of the matter or inter se disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent herein, deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition , 3 CVB& J Wp ll25l_2o25 directing respondent No.3 to dispose of the representations/ appeals, dated 07.11.2O2O and 07.11.20?2 submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner and the unofhcial respondent herein, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of eight (O8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Operative part

5.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

6.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand c'losed. //TRUE COPYII SD/- A. SRINIVASA REDDY ASS T T REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue. Department, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Terangana

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dummugudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

3. The District Collector Bhadradri Kothagudem District at Kothagudem 4. The Mandal Revenue officer, Dummugudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District 5. One CC to SRI P.V.RAMANA, Advocate. tOpUCl 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana. i i l ,

7.

Two CD Copies. BSK GJP s I rr{f sir{ Ie +,J( 2s Afn 7t]i5 i r:n1n 11--r r(-O HIGH COURT DATE D : 1 510412025 ) ORDER WP.No.11251 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ef{8 W

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Constitution of India — arts. 3, 21, 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151; Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Telangana High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments