The High Court · 2025

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTI C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITIO N NO: 4337 0F 2025 Between: Pinninti Raji Reddy, S 582, Rangareddy Nag a o Sa Red v aged d Jf as arS Occ p rivate Ma kafs n District Ri./o H No 24- AND ...PETITIONER

1. The State of.Telangana, rep.by the pri Secretariat, Hyderabad. The District Collector, Warangal District at Warangal The Revenue Divisional Officer, Wa The Tahsihar / Sub Registrar, Wardhan 3 4 al Division, Warangal District Mandal, Warangal District pal Secretary, Revenue Department, 5 S mt {t E Laxm RYo H no 1 7 998 k o E an ki s Feed Co 3t2 Na nd H S 1 0 6 P n n n SomESwa o H N o 3 F 4 1 1 1 S/o Pi nn I B!xapa tamg adda Ward an h r Aged rl8 years, occ. housewife, ny, Near Zoo Park, Hanamkonda iAged 28 years, occ. business. R/ , Warangal 506 3'13 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Con circumstances stated in the affidavit filed pleased to issue an order, writ or direction, Writ of Mandamus, declaring the 4th resporri the documents in favour of the unofficial res the petitioner agricultural lands to an extent situated at Nallabelli Revenue Village, Ward without considering the representation dated legal notice dated 20.O2.2025 is illegal, arbit natural justice and also opposed to Articles .l ution of lndia praying that in the herewith, the High Court may be ore particularly one in the nature of in trying to entertain/ registering ndents 5 and 6 in connection with Ac.8.20 gts in Sy No. 445 and 446 annapet Mandal, Warangal District 7.2.2025 ard 12.O2.2D25 and also ry and against to the principles of , 19, 21 and 300-4 of Constitution /.1 of lndia and consequently to direct the respondents not to entertain / register any document in favor of the unofficial respondents 5 and 6 by considering the representation dated 17.2.2025 and 12.02.2025 and also legal notice dated 20.02.2025 of the petitioner in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petilion, the High Court may be pleased to Direct the respondents not to entertain / register any document in favor of the unofficial respondents 5 and 6 by considering the representation dated 17.2.2025 and 12.02.2025 and also legal notice dated 20.02.2O25 of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI AJAY KUMAR MADISETTY Gounsel for the Respondents No.1to4: SRI L.RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondents No.5&6 : -- The Court made the following: ORDER 1r, HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. . BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 4337 of2o25 ORDER: It is stated that the petitione 's father by name Sai Reddy was the absolute owner and posse sor of the land admeasuring Acs.S.2O guntas in Sy.Nos.445 an 446, situated at Nallabelli Revenue Village, Wardhannapet andal, Wanral District and his name was incorporated in I the revenue records as pattadar and possessor. The ce of the petitioner is that respondent No.5, by impersonatio a fraudulent sale deed has been created over the subject ian stands in the name of his father and basing on the sarne stre had obtained pattadar passbook No.T22 15OO32478 an also receiving vanous incentives sanctioned by the Gov rnment from time to time Hence, this rvrit petition

2. Considered the submlsslons ade by the learned counsel fcrr the petitioner and Sri L. nder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. I to 4 and rvith therr consen , this writ petitircn is being disposed of at the admissron s . In vierrv of the nature of relief sought lor in this nrit petiti n, issuance o[ notice to the unol fi ciai respondents is dispensed with. 2 C\tsR. J wp 14337 2025

3. lrarned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would contend that in view of the involvement of third party rights and since the claim of the petitioner is that the registered sale deed executed in favour of respondent No 5 is not genuine one, the petitioner is not entitled to file the present writ petition under /l-ttcle 226 of the Constitution of India to decide the disputed questions i.e., execution of sale deed, its authenticity and genuineness.

4. In Mohan Pandeg as. usha Rani Raigariar the Honlele Supreme Court observed as follows: "6: xxxx..... It has repeatedlg been hetd bg this Court as also bg uaious High Courts thot a regular sull is ahe appropiote remedg for settlement of drsputes relahig to propertg ngllts betueen pivate persons and thQt tle remedg under Article 226 oJ the Constitution shalL not be auailable except where uiolation of some statutory dutg on the part of Q statutory authontA is alleged" And in such q cc,se, the Courl Lu L tssue apPropnate direction to tlrc authoritg concemed. IJ' ttrc rcal gneuonce of the respottdent is against the initiatlotL of cnnural proceedtrgs' arrcl the orders passed and sleps laken tLereoi' she rnust aual of the remedg under the general lorr. urclurfutg the Cruninal Procedure CorTe' The High Court cannol QL[ou] tlrc consttl'ttiotlQl Jurisdiction to be used for deciditg dISPr/tes. &r l{rhiclL reme(hes, uruler the general taw, ciuil or cnmtral, ore au(1ilable. It ts not itll.e'vied to repLqce the ord.inary rettedres bg utag of a sttit or applicatott auailable to t(t9921 4 SCC 61 I I t \ 3 CVBR, J Wp 11337 2O25 a litigant. The lurisdiction is should not be exercised casually ecial and ertraordinary and r lightlg." (emplwsis supplied).

5. ln Dwarka Prasad. A I a. B.D. Agarual2, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed s follows "The lligh Coult while exercisi concemed with illegqlitg, inatio of an order passed bg the State o un<1er Article 226 of the Constitu for resolutiotL of a pnuate lano d from a dispute nuoluing publtc settled that a wnt remedg is propertg or a title dtspute_" a pouEr oJ ludicial revieut is litg aru7 procedural improprietg a statutory autlnitA. Renedg on of India caruat be inwked spute as contra distinguished. aw character. It is elso well- auoilable for resolution of a

6. In the instant case, the c respondent No_S had obtained playing fraud. It rhe peritioner is material to sa_y that respondc registered sale deed by playing lr competen t civil Court see king for im of the petitioner is that e registered sale deed by avrng any grievance arld has t No.s had obtained the ud, he has to approach the claration. In view of the above, this Courr deems it appro riate to dispose of this writ petition relegating the petitioner to approach the cornpet€nt civil Court questioning the validitv or o herwise of the registered sale ,(2OO3) 6 SCC 23O 4 CVBR, J wp-14737 _2025

7. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs 8 ' As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. \ t ,ITRUE coPY/l "i$+iu?:l;l?S+l[t I hrfr- secriSn'orrtcen To' '1ry, Revenue Department' Secretariat' state of , +:i"[JffIilr'o%"l,"lla 2' The District Collector' Warangal District at Warangal 3. The Revenue Oivisionat Omc"'' Wa"ng't Division' Warangal District 4. The Tahsildu' l tuo *lnotrar' Wardhannapet Mandal' Warangal District 5. one CC to SRI nLnv flr'/lnn MADISETTY' Advocate toPUCl 6. Two CCs to GP fOn ngVgftf Ug' High Court for the State of Telangana' touTl

7. Two CD CoPies' (k BSK PVL \ \ t I i I I I HIGH COURT DATED:09 10612025 I I i i e () 6 IltE g r..1 \.,a:\. r * ORDER WP.No.14337 ot 2025 11 AUE M ({\ t' ! 2 <t .lr. DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (a- 2)