The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Petil oner: SRI SHAIK MADAR Counsel for the Resl r:rndent No.1 to 4: SRI L.RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the ollowing: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY VIRIT PETITION No.13994 of 2025 ORDER This Writ Petition is filed praying this Court to declare the action of respondent No.4 in issuing notice uide Rc.No.B/ 1 1 1 / 2025, dated O3.O4.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and violative of Articles 14,21 atd,3O0-A of the Constitution of India and consequently, prayed to set aside the same.

2. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Acs'7.00 guntas in Sy No'257/A, situated at V.Venkatayapalem Village, Raghunadhapalem Mandal, Khammam District, having acquired the same under registered partition deed bearing document No'1842 of 2015' dated 18.12.2O15. It is further stated that the name of the petitioner was mutated in all the reverule records and he was also issued pattadar passbook bearing No'T261401OO681 under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O (for short "the Act 9 of 2O2O"l ' It is stated that the respondent No.5 has submitted an application seeking to cancel the pattadar passbook issued in favour of the petitioner for the land to an extent of Acs'5'26 guntas in Sy.No.257/AA of Venkatayapalem and acting on the said 2 CVBR, J \\,P l:]994 2025 \ applicatio-r. I e impugned notice was issued. Hence thr:present writ petiti,) I

3. C)onsi,: .e.d the submissions of the learned cou-rs,:l for the petitionor irr r Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant C overnment Pleader for r . ;pondent Nos.1 to 4 and with their c.onsr:nt, this writ petLti,) I i; being disposed of at the admissiorL stzrge. In view of tlri 'ature of relief sought for in this issuance ,)r' r:)Lice to the unofficial respondent v'r t petil.ion, is dispensed with.

4. Lr:ar n e.r inler se dis rl have attilir rcc the sons ol 'e 197 1. L,ca'ne suit was irrr;t 2012 on .lL: Khammam e;- dated, 06.C€.l judgment ar ri has submiil <: impugneC r c t i:ounsel for the petitioner has submitte.rl -hat the r ,ls between the petitioner and respor de nt No.s -inality in view of disposal of the appeal filed by ;::rondent No.S under Section S (S) of tt RCR Act, counsel for the petitioner further sultr-ritrs that a r .r'cd by one K.Sudha Rani uide O.:j,Nc.460 oI ;lle oI the III Additional Junior C]ir.it Judge, thc same was decreed uide judgment a nc clecree (t22, whereas seeking implementation cf t ee said :Lecree, respondent No.5 herein i.e., { Se kkubai I representation and acting on the san.re, the ' I was issued. It is the case of the petit or er that 3 CVBR, J wP 13994 2025 respondent No.5 is no way concerned with regard to the subject property nor she derived any benefits under the said decree sought to be implemented.

5. A careful examination of the material on record wouid reveal that respondent No.S had submitted an application seeking cancellation of the pattadar passbook issued to the petitioner and to issue e-pattadar pass book in her favour to an extent of Acs.5.26 guntas in Sy.No.257/AA of V.Venkatayapalem Village in terms of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.46O of 2Ol2 on the Iile of the III Additiona-l Junior Civil Judge, Khammam and acting on the said application respondent No.4 issued the impugned notice, dated 03.O4.2025. It is the contention of the petitioner that the suit was instituted by one K.Sudha Rani and the respondent No.5 herein has nothing to do with the subject properties and issuance of notice to lhe petitioner is in violation of ROR AcL, 2O2O and Rules made thereunder. The impugned order is a notice issued to the petitioner on the application being submitted by the respondent No.5, if the petitioner is having any objection for implementation of judgment and decree, she can submit objections/ documents denying the claim of decree holders and also hling appropriate applications before the Executing Court. As per the provisions of I I .l i-s 'tuu_,rrffij ; -r rvl1u a''e claiming "t:,=:::"* the .r^ - - nr" ,n. . .,:: rights ov::r ,n. name cf rh r pat ": Revenue Summonses 1 jand' '""" nouce to t;;.."."", to examine wheth :. take .suir.r,.:.T'.:::r#j:::. records ltr,: ,-npugned and it is ,"-, ,",j::::::":: orrra- .._ :::,.:T:: ; """7 aalerldrnenl of the said this writ petidon is o;,b a notice ",.* cause no,ices, tnt /urirlira rev-ew illeg'ri z'p'srverse ,",;;;,;.,:: "."::. for correction ; settlea posiro' ,:.::,1;,: orders. In vi<,,.r .,r.,;t"'"to wourd be nle ,r'1,'oou" :, Tj; expjanado,/c,, ,,,",ln. ::':::. ;ffi ,: l .;,il'::T:,,*;;.,;"":,::_ -,J';*,r'::.:' ,any to exanrire r'tith 'aw' receipt 6'-cr)P.u '"'"**1.*.";::" months from the 0.,. ."0"""" "-"' tr'r .""porJ.irf to"rr've action .-.-:;:::;.; ff::".,:;,,,:. of this ordg-. .p,, ,rr., directed not ro ril ,, u,n properrr, ir rry r,,r,n..." 6. With the,rborr of. There sha.ll be ;r .r r .der rbsen,B6iorr", this Writ F )etition as to costs. is disposetl I i t ! 5 CVB& J wP t3994 2025 7 As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// sD/-T. TIRUMALA DEVI DEPUTY SECTION O FFICER To, retariat, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar I The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department' ' BH;; i5;k Bund R<jad, HYderabad' 2. The District Collector, Khammam District' 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer' Khammam Division' Khammam District' 4. The Manda, Revenue officer, Raghunadhapalem Mandal, Khammam District. 5. One CC to SRI SHAIK MADAR' Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE' High Court for the State of Telangana at HYderabad [OUT]

7. Two CD CoPies BSR BSw I l HIGH COUFr]' DATED:02lltt',t2025 ORDER WP.No.13994 of 2O2S ==. t'.(-. i 'a ( 2r * a) a s 1t .i"q DISPOSING ()II: THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT CCISITS \.o .od4 Y> -<\5\" vp\