✦ High Court of India · 15 Oct 2025

The High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 15 Oct 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
15 Oct 2025
Length
1,495 words

Petition under Article 226 ol lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondents, more specifically, Respondent No.5 in considering and taking any action pursuant to the Representation d|.26.06.2024 submitted by the Petitioner herein, requesting the entry of his name in Sethwar/Land Register to an extenl of Ac. 2.00 gts in Sy. No. 688 in Laxmapur Village as well as Dharani Portal and issuance of updated Pattadar Passbook in his favour as being illegal, arbitrary and u ncon stitutio na I apart from being vrolative of Article 14 and 3004 of the cc rstitution of lndia and consequently direct Respondent No. 5 to enter the name : r ' the petitioner herein in Sethwar/Land Register as well as Dharani portal and rlso to issue updated Pattadar Passbook in his favour AND/OR IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition unCer Section 15 1 CPC praying that in the r:i the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Co I direct Respondent No. 5 to consider representation dt. 2t. the Petitioner herein by entering/incorporating the name of I Sethwar/Land Register including Dharani portal and issrr Passbook to the extent of Ac. 2.00 gts in Sy. No 688 pending disposal of the above Writ petition and may be pl,: I cumsta nces stated in t may be pleased to )O.2024 submitted by )e Petrtioner here in in -rg updated Pattadar n Laxma p ur Village. ;ed Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VADEENDRA JOSHT Counsel for the Respondents: SRI L. RAVINDER, AGp ApF EARING ON BEHALF OF GP FOR REVENUE SRI K. MURLIDHAR The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.14659 of 2025 ORDER: Thc petrtioncr has filcd the prescnt u,rit petition undcr Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia, seeking issuancc of a writ of mandamus, challcnging thc inaction of the resportdents, particularly respondent No. 5, in considcring his representation dated 26.06-2024. The representation seeks t hc e ntry ol thc petitioucr's name in thc Sethwar/ Land Register ancl t>n the Dhartrni Portzrl atrcl the issuance ol' an updated palladar passbook in respccL of lar-rcl admeasurirlg Ac.2.O0 gts., in St,.No.688, Lzrxmapltr Village. The pctitioncr conte nds that thc failure to act is illegal, arbitrary and unconstilutional, infringing Articles l4 and 30OA of the Constitution o[ h'rdia-

2. Heard Sri V:-rclt:cndra .Ioshi, lcanrcd counscl for thc petitioner and Srr L.Ravindcr, lcarned Assistanl Governmcnt Pleadcr appearing on beh:,Llf ol icarned Governn-rcnt Pleader for Revenue Sri K.Muralidhar.

3. The lcarned counsel for thc petitioner submits that the petitioner being the absolute owner is in continuous possession of the subject property since 2O06, as reflected in revenue records, pahanis, pattadar passbook and title deeds. The property was previously part of Pagc 2 ofJ a larger holding, partially sold and subscqucr-rt1 l)artitioned, leaving tlre petitioner in poss<'ssion of Ac.2.OO gts_ [)rlrlit! hc l]019 sun,e\, thc petitioncr's abscnr;c resulted in non-inclrrsiorr : his name in Lhe Sethrvar, dt-.spite prior mutatiorr :rnd posscs.i rn. 'l'he peliti()ner provided all necessary documents ancl r-(tpr...: ( rtiltior.)s, inc)uding subrnission on 05.03.2O25, yet no corrective :rctil I h:r s becn takcn trv thc re sponder-rts. [{ar.ing left \r,ith no othr:r ..1] . r n;r tc rcmedr', the petltioner se eks tht: exercise of tl-ris IIon'trlc ( r rrrt's cxtrzr.lclin:rrv jurisdiction to direct the respondents to rct:rtrrl 1L ; .r'.crship irr tl-rt: Scthrvar/Lanci Registcr, update the Dhar:r.i I)r)rli r iL.(l rssuc I)atr:t(l:lr pirssbook in his Iavorrr. Interi[i relicf is also rs,, , ]rrt l(r pre\cr( i-r n.] prejudice penrling frnal disposal of the u rit I)cririon

4. Tltc k::rrrtr:ri Assistzrnt ()o'er.nrc.t I I .irci.r, rc1;rescntinl lcarned Government Pleader for Revenue slrbmirs rr:rr lhc] petitio.er,s cl,im is prematur€: and misconceived. Tl-rc 20 1! surr,,cv, c,ncJuclecl under thc Bhu Bharati Act, follor.r,ed due stittr.lt ( r !: I)rr)cess anci the petitioncr's absence does not entitle him to aut ) n:rtic e,tty i, the Sethrvar. The petitioner may be directed to make r rirrrnirl applir::rt io. under the Bhu Bharati Act for rectification of recor ls, rrltcr ,r4-r ich the authorities shall consider it in accordance with lar,r,.

5. On a careful consideration of the srr I trissions made b1, both sides.nd upon perusal of the record, this C. _t -1 , u,ithout rnaki.g -F".W'.v ,/ I i I i I I I ! ! I I I i I Page 3 ofJ any obscrvations on the ntcriLs and demerits of the case, gratrts liberty to the petitioner to make .cccssary appliczltion as per the pr.visions of Bhu-Bharati Act and up,n such filine, rhe rcspondcnts arc dircctecl to pass appropriate orders in rrc:cordance u,ith law dulv issning no(iccs to all the intcrested parties:rncl upon giving thcm sufficient opportunity of hearing, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, u,ithin a period three months thereof.

6. With the above oltservations, this writ petition is disposed No order as to the costs. Miscellancous applications, if any pending, shall stand closcd -SD/.C. DEEPIKA A ISTANT REGIST //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER V To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad - 500022.

2. The District Collector, trledcha l- Malkajg iri District. 3. The tr/andal Revenue Officer, Medchal-lrlalkajgiri District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Offrcer, Keesara Division. 5. Assistant Director (FAC), Sur.vey and Land Records, Medchal-Malka,igiri District.

6. Assistant Director, survey and Land Records, collector office complex, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

7. The Tahsildar, Muduchintalapally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District' B. One CC to SRI VADEENDRA JOSHI, Advocate [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana' louTI

10.Two CD CoPies PVL BS v HIGH COURT DATED:1 511012025 \ I I ORDER WP.No.14659 of 2025 .1' rhI j I,r '.. tt) I I I a tr \ \ t I I I ! ! i ! i i i I ! i i DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \ \?, \0 Gg€ MEMORANDUM OF CRIMINAL PETITION (Under Section 528 of BNSS) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD I.A No of 2025 In Crl. P No of 2025 Between

1. Aane Naveen Kumar Reddy S/o A.VenkataSatyanarayana ,Age 33 years, occ: Business, R/o Plot no 7, Dhanalaxmi Nagar, Bapuji Nagar, Bowenpally .Secundrabad

2. Gudise Murali Krishna S/o Lingaiah, Age:25 years, Occ: private Employee R/o H no 1-82l2,Chinchalpet(v),Nawabpet (M),Vikarabad District ......Petitioner/Accused 1 & 3 And

1. State of Telangana, Rep by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad

2. SmtThammadi Shirisha w/o Late Naga Venkateswarlu Aged 33 years, Occ; Business, No l-78/2/58, ground floor, Sai ram Nagar Colony, Boduppal ,Hyderabad ...... Respondent No.1 ....... Respondent no 2/ Complainant JOINT MEMO

1. It is submitted that the petitioners and the Respondents herein filed the present joint Memo to compound the offences against petitioners/Accusedno 1& 3 herein as the matter is settled out of court amicably.

2. That due to the intervention of the mediators and amicable settlement, respondent no.2/Complainant has no further interest in proceeding with the prosecution of the case settling the matter amicably 3ki$E o

3. The 2nd Respondent agreed to withdraw sC no 601 t 2024 on the fire of Reddy District At Honble special court for the trail of sC/srs (poA) Act,pz .rga LB Nagar) 4 That the both parties hereby agree to withdraw the casit .lnconditionally

5. For the reasons stated above, it is therefore prayed tr rt this Hon,bre Court may be pleased to rcceive this joint memo and comp r rnd the offence and pass such order or orders that this court may deem fit ar 1 necessary Hyderabad Dated:>\10-2025 Cou S the Pe tioner ( c"

0.i/- \ Counsel for the respondent's . .,. -' , \.., \' ^\:.\. "^.rt\ r, I' x6 i,li ,l ,i .,.',i/ .1:/ LIL I \ 11 t . < Y<t "t-- i*t ( '" - 1 De facto - 3omplainant , [nne Petitioneri rccused no. 1 1/fivrEd kum< q l1 l\U'..ti PYilL'^1 Petitioner,,,,ccused no.3

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