Anusupalli Laxmi v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the lvlemo No.B,119212025 dated 07 -04'2025 issued by the 4th respondent directing the Mandal Girdavar, Dharur Mandal to take over the agricultural land to an extent of Ac.2.04 Guntas in Sy. No. '19715, of Dharur Village and Mandal, Vikarabad District as illegal, arbitra.ry and in violation pf the Provisions of the Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act 1977 and rules framed there under, violalion of principle of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14,21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently, set aside the Memo No-B,119212025 dated 07 -04-2025 issued by the 4th responder. rrd further directed the respondents not tc interfere and dispossess the peliri( f rer from the agricultural lands to an extent of Ac.2.04 Gts in Dharur Village anc \4 rr.dal, Vikarabad District. |.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition [-]n c e r the affidavit filed r d irect the respond erl to an extent of Ac.il Vikarabad District, b1 issued by the 4th n-.:;p :ection 151 CPC praying that iiithe circumstr:nces stated in trpport of the petition, the High Court m:ry be pleased to ; not to dispossess the petitioner from the arlrrcultural land ,1 Guntas in Sy. No. 19714 of Dharur V tl,:gr.r and Mandal, suspending the Memo No 8.119212025 dated 07-04-202s :'ndent pending disposal of the above writ pet tion. Counsel for the Petiti :ner : SRI HARINATH REDDY SOMA Counsel for the Resp )ndents : AGP FOR REVENUE The Court at the stag' , of admission made the following ORDEFI t I t i I t I : .j i I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14O88 of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking following relief "For the reasons stated in the occompanAing affidauit, it is praged that the Hon'ble Court may be pleo,sed to issue Wit order or direction more partianlarlg one in the nature of Writ of Mondamus challenging the Memo No.B/ 192/2025 dated 07-04 2025 issued by the 4th respondent directing the Mandal Girdauar, Dharur Manda[ to take ouer the agricultural land to an ertent oJ Ac-2-O4 Guntas in Sg. No. 197/5, of Dharur Viltage and Mandol, Vikqrabad District as illegal, arbitrary and in uiolation of the Proutsions of tlrc Telangana Assigned. Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act 1977 qnd nlles framed there under, uiolation of principle oJ natural justice and in uiolation of Atticles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequentlg, set aside the Memo No.B/ 192/ 2025 dated 07-04 2025 issued bg the 4th respondent an(l fufther directed the respondents not to interfere and dispossess the petitioner from the agicultural lands to an extent of Ac.2.04 Gts in Dhqntr VilLoge and Mqndal, Vikqrqbad Distict' and pass such other order or orders qs this Hon'ble CoutT mag deem rtt and proper in tlle ciralmstances of the case."

2. It is stated that the petitioner belongs to scheduled caste community and landless poor person. It is further stated that the petitioner purchased land admeasuring Acs. 2.04 guntas in Survey No. 197/5 and Acs. O.O4 guntas' in Survey No.136/ 1, situated at Dharur Village and Mandal, Vikarabad District (for short, 'the subject land), from one Patti Yellalya in the year 20 i0. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted arr application as a purchasee of the land and acting on the same , patta issued in favour of her vendor Patti Yellaya was cancelled and the land purchased by the petitioner was regularized under Section 3(5) of the Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short, 'the Act 9 of 7977), uide proceedings No.Bll37 l2O1 t dated 15.02.2011 and the name of 2 continues in the :.r: of acquisition ts re:t 2O2O\ uide Pa11a El.r Rights in Lan<i ancl was also issue'd -o No.307175 ancl I)rrt i CVBR; J V'..).Xo. 14O88 of 2025 the petitioner \\/ti -tutated in the revenue records and oirtt rdar passbook and title deed u'(:rc i ;sued in favour of the petitioner unde r th,: provisions of the Telangana R 5h ; in Land and pattadar passbooks Act. l)71(for short, 'the ROR Act., L,): ) and the Rules made thereunder. ui le Title Deed No. 1 192 and subsequently, digital I)e rti.,ciar passbook '.he petitioner under the provisions o I t he Telangana l'attadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O (for sh,rrr, ,the ROR Act, rt: No.T0704O1S1094 and Khata No.3!l.I a rd the nature r :led as ceiling patta and till clate, the peti tioner,s name , :nue records. It is further stated that claiming the rr,:d land and prohibited for transfcr, th,-4r respondent I notice uide No.B/ 792/2025 darcd 03 Ot..2O2S under 1 tna Assigned Lands (prohibition of ,lr.arrsfers) - to show cause as to why the petition e - s hould not be {rr:d lands and the petitioner submitterl a reply to the 1025 stating about the regularization of rer title and r dings dated 15.02.2011. It is fur.the r st€, ted that the ( a memo uide No.Bl192/2025 d.atcd O7.O4.2O25 r rlent-Mandal Girdavar to take over the su f,Ject land of r ievance of the petitioner is that the -. 1 respondent, impugned memo dated 07.O4.2025 issue,l by the 4n rt dispossess the petitioner from the srrbject land. subject land as as s i5 has issued d For r .- Rule 3 of the Telan 2OO7 to the petitiorre evicted from the a ssi said notice on l 8. C ll possession uide prccr 4ft respondent is s _Lr the petitioner. The 1 directing the 5fi rer;1rc under the guise ,rf tl-r respondent, is Lry-in51 Rules, Hence, the present ,r r. , ltetition ...Fqr!,r& l Z ./ 3 CVBR, J W.P.No.14O88 of 2O2S

3. considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and with their consent this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. l:

4. Learned counser for the petitioner vehementry contended that name of the petitioner was mutated in the revenue records and pattadar passbook and title deed were issued in favour of the petitioner under the provisions of the RoR Act, 1g71 and the Rules made thereunder uid.e Title Deed No.307175 and Patta No.l r92 and subsequently, digital pattadar passbook was aiso issued to the petitioner under the provisions oi the RoR Act, 2O2O uide Patta Book No.T07O4O151O84 and Khara No.325, the respondent authorities, at this length of time, are not having any right or authority to invoke the provisions of the Act 9 of 1977 lor cancellation of the pattadar passbook and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioner. Learned counsel further contended that when the petitioner submitted a reply dated

18.03.2025 by enclosing all the necessary documcnts to the form II notice uideNo.B/192/2025.dated 03.03.2025 issued by the 46 respondent, instead of passing a reasoned order to enabre the petitioner to file an appropriate appeal, the 4tt1 respondent has issued the impugned memo uide No.Bll92/2o25 dated 07.o4.2o2s for resumption of the subject rand. Learned counsel further contended that the said impugned memo passed by the 46 respondent is bereft of any reasons and the same is contrary to the Act 9 of L977 and not in consonance with the principles of natural justice. -''' ..:it3Ery€J;-a+ 4 petitioner uide pn>t-e CVBR, J W'.1'.N t.14088 of 2025 5. A peru iLl of the impugned .rrremo uide No.B/i9212O25 dated O7.O4.2O25 w,cu1c t,real that the petitioner has subrnitt,:ci an explanation dated 18.03.2025 Except stating that the pdtitioner l:as viorated the assignment cot.tdi: ir r s purchasing the assigned lands frorn one A.Lalitha devi, the impr-rgne1 r,Lemo does not contain any reasons lcr :esumption of the subject lan'd r i; also seen from the record that the 4rh respondent has not examined tlrc ,:gularization proceedings issued i -r fi.vour of the :,-lings No.B/ 137 /2011 dated 75.O2.2O11 rr_rcl issuance ' under the provisions of ROR Acr, 1()i I while issurng , loubt, the respondent No.4 is conferrr:c u ith power for r rrent for violation of conditions stipu l:,te,1 in Act 9 of r t-ing any action for resumption, rhe rt:str:ondent No.4 . :rse of the petitioner strictly in accc rrla; rce with the t,, enable the petitioner to avail thc statlltcn, remedy of I under the Act. It is settled law that rhe issuance of l:red to be an order and more particularly, r.l,hen no :'L assigned. Therefore, the impugned menro issued by liable to be set aside. of pattadar passb t: I 1977 but before i eit impugned memo. N o cancellation of as ;i51 has [o examino t]),_- provisions of thc AcL, an appeal as pr.ov.c e memo is never <:o;.t;i the respondent No. l i valid reasons have lre

6. Accorcl rLll . , the impugned .rrre'rrro uid.e No.B/192/2O25 dated 07 'o4 '2025 issued t''r r respondent No.4 is set aside and t.-re respondent No 4 is directed to Fa;i a reasoned order duly taking into <ons deration of the explanation ancl rhe documents submitted by the oe,.it.ioner, in accordance with the p:; r 'zisions of the Act g or rg77, within a pr:rrod of three 'e L 5 CVBR, J W.P.No.14O88 of 2025 (o3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicare the same to the petitioner. Tilr passing of the fina1 orders, the respondent No'4 is directed not to take any coercive action against the petitioner in respect of the subject land, in any manner. 7 ' with the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. To i i I { I SD/-AHMED ABDULLAH KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER Secr etariat, State of

1. The Principal Secreta ry, Revenue DePartment, T Telanoana at Hvderabad.

2. The D-istrict Collector, Vikarabad District' Vikarabad' 5. fn" nurenre Divisional Officer, Vikarabad Division, Vikarabad' Vikarabad District.

4. The Tahsildar, Dharur Mandal, Dharur, Vikarabad District S. iii" fvfi"Ort-diraOarar, Vikarabad Mandal, Vikarabad, Vikarabad District.. O.f*"CCstoGPFORREVENUE,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat t ohe cc to sRl HARINATH REDDY SOMA, Advocate [oPUC] B. Two CD CoPies Hyderabad. [OUT] SA BS N, I t I I t I l t: :l I I I I I I I HIGH COURT DATED:02 t0S,tit02S I ftlE s l',.r;- c o 2 2 tLN ?t, :5 C\r +n a '., a,: . - \l_ - :-2 _- a ORDER WP.No.14088 c,f 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COS TS. 4 a"t\ X) c,