Avula Susheela v. The State of Telangana

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 appropriate writ or direction, more particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent no. 3 and 4 in de- listing the land to an extent of Ac 2.20gts in Sy no 86ta, Ac 2.2Ogts in Sy nO 86/44 situated at Elikatta Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Rangareddy District from the Prohibitory List as illegal arbitrary and consequen y direct the respondents no.3 and 4 to take steps to delist the land to an extent of Ac 2.20gts in Sy no B6/a, Ac 2.20gts in Sy nO 86iAA situated at Elikatta Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Rangareddy District from the Prohibitory List forthwith by considering our representations. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under ll :ction 1 51 CPC praying that in the circum sta nces stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be plr:ased to issue interim directions to r,:;pondent No. 3 and 4 to de-list the scheculr,r property i.e., Iand to an extent of Ac 2.2ogts in Sy no 86/a, Ac 2.20gts in Sy n3 ;]6/44 situated at Elikatta Village, Fsrc ocinagar Mandal, Rangareddy Diltrict, frorr lhe Prohibitory List forthwith by cont;i,J:ring our representations pending disposai of writ petition. Counsel for the Petitic,ner: M/S MADHAVI PRIYA MANTENA Counsel for the Respc'ndents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the fc.llowing: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1313 5 af 2025 ORDER: This Writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is hled seeking the following relief: ?:.r.oso i._.....1".oty. an appropriate writ or direction more partianlarlg a Writ in .the 2yture of Mandamu_s dectaing ti" iiiion of tfu respondent Nos.3 and 4 in de_li_sting tne lani toin extent of o: in ss No.86/a, Ac.2.2ogti i" si N".;Z;AA situated. at Elikatta Village, Farooqmtgar Manrlal, "Rangaredd.y Dtstnct Jrom the Prohibitoru List as legaL, .arbitrary oli .oir.qu"nttg direct the respondents wos.3 aid'4 t" t"i;;;;;" lo ielist the t:"7_r"^an extent of Ac.2.2-osts i" sa i".siii"a"i.i.zost" in Sy No.8b/ AA situored at Etikana VittZg" f"r..qrisZ, r,aonaot i::::::!!:^.:Ls:lct from the prohibitory-iii ]iii_rn as cotlstaenng our representations and be pleased to pass.....,, 2 Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage.

3. It is stated that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuring an extent of Acs.2.20 guntas in Sy.No.86/a, Acs.2.2O guntas in Sy.No.86/Au{ situated at Elikatta Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Rangareddy District. The said lands are Inam ianrls and after conducting enquiry as per the provisions of The Telangana Abolition of Inams Act, 1955. (for short, 'the Act, 1955) and the Rules made thereunder, Occupancy 2 w \ RightCertilicat' uideO.R.CProceedingsNo.RoRl:r7819i.;12072, Passbooks Acl , provisions of dated28.12.2C'l12hasbeenissuedinfavourofthepetitr'rn:r'The name of thc pe til.irner is also recorded in the Revenue Re cords and Pattadar Passbr' I ks and Title Deed s were also iss'ued :rs per the '1-lre Telangana Rights in Land and I 'attadar 2 J2O (for short, 'the ROR Act, 201)0) 'lh'rreafter' i1 'osc over the subject property with the rldjacent when disPtLtes owners, the p, :t.i:ioner was constrained to institrlte a S uit uide O.S.No.344 of lC 24 on the hle of the Iearned Junior Civit Judge' Shadnagzrr ancl trc same is pending for adjuclicati:n l ' il; furlher stated that e\rrl.1 hough there is no stay or status tluo o'd< r on the subject pr,lpcl t y' in the Suit, the rcspondents h erein li'ited the same in a Dhr: rtLri Portal as prohibited property. Aggricve'd b1' the same, the pctil.i()ner approachecl the respondent author'ties and made an appli, a'ion seeking to delete the subject tr)ropelty fi'om the list of prohilrited properties and unblock the sun'e t rumbers which was reir:,: ecl uide Proceedings No'B/ 144 I 20 I 2O''lS Hence' the presenl \\ I r1 o, 1ition. Learnerl c ounsel appearing for the petiti'lner vereemently + contended thi t1. once the Occupancy Right Cert'ificzLtr: lras been issued undcr lt e provisions of the Act, 1955 atrd cons':quential entries have L,ee n made under the provisions of R'OR Act 2020 by 3 issuing Pattadar Passbooks, the respondents are not having any power to interfere with the peaceful possession of the propertSr nor include the same in prohibited properties list in any manner as the O.R.C confers absolute rights to the petitioner. 5 Learned Assistant Government pleader for Assignment would submit that in view of issuance of O.R.C under the provisions of the Act, 1955 and since the suit is pending, respondent_authorities have rejected the application submitted by the petitioner uide Proceedings No.Bl1,4al20l2O2S, for delering the subject properly from the list of prohibitcd properties.

6. In vieu. of the aforesaid submission, this Court is of the opinion that except stating that suit is pending, the respondents have not mentioned any valid reasons. Mere pendency of the suit in lhe absence of granting any interim injunction prohibiting transfer/ alienation the respondents cannot place the properties for which O.R.C has been issued under the list of prohibited properties. As per the provisions of the Act, 1955, once O.R.C has been issued, the O.R.C holders are having absolute rights of the property for transfer or the alienation subject to the conditions mentioned under the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. Since it is the case of the petitioner that pattadar Passbooks have also been issued, respondent Nos.3 and 4 are not { 4 ,,x having any llo\r':rr- to interfere into possession or block th() Froperty for further tran''.i cLions or listing of the proper[ in 1he list of prohibited prop( r'l ies. A. Accordins,L'.' the impugned rejection order passt cl by the respondents is s: aside and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are rlirected to examine thc request of the petitioner for c1ele1ic'n of the properties frorrr the list of prohibited properties lp'ln the application beir-,t1 made by the petitioner as per ttre prr'vi;ions of Bhu Bharari (lir:cord of Rights in Land) Act, 2025 an':l the Rules made thereun(1, )1.. g With the abovc observations, this Writ Pelitior-r is d sp'osecl of There shall be r:r order as to costs

9., . As a seq:e l, the miscellaneous petitions pt:ndir.rq, if any, shall stand clos;c c //TRUE COPY// SD/- N. SRIHARI ASSTSTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER The Principal Se,cretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Thr. State of Telangana, l-lycerabad. The Collector, Rangareddy District. The Revenue D visional officer, Shadnagar Division, Ranga!-ecdy District The Tahsildar, E likatta, Faroocinagar Mandal, Rangareddy District. One CC to M/s. lMadhavi Priya lt/antdna, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to (iP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [CtLl-l-] Two CD Copir.,s To, 1 2 3 4 5 6

7. TJ GJP HIGH COURT DATED:28l0tll1>-025 ORDER WP.No.1313ti of 2025 /: .,:/ )a -'#.:' ,r, *-, s? - Nq) \ {. :-J DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS 1l' \