High Court · 2025

4. The Tahsildhar, Dharmasagar I\/andal, Warangal Urban District 5. Smt. Buyya Kyatamma, W/o. Bala Komuraiah, Aged 45 Years, Occ' - H;,is"r'if'e, Fl/'o. Narayanagiri Village, Dharmasagar [\'4andal, Warangal urban District, (Erstwhile Warangal Dist.) ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fited therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of wRlT oF MANDAIVUS declaring the action of the Respondents no.4 for deleting the name of Buyya Mallesh in Pattadhar and Possession column by entering the name of the Respondent no.5 in respect of the lands in Sy.no.871/C/l to an extent of Ac.1-02 Guntas, situated at Mupparam Village, Dharmasagar lvlandal, warangal Urban District (Erstwhile warangal District) without issuance of the notice inspite of the pending Representation , daled 271o812020 of the Petitioner to the Respondents authorities is illegal and arbitrary against the principal of natural justice without following the under section 5 and 9(j )(aXi) of A.p.Rights in Land and Pattadhar Pass Book Act, 1971 and consequenfly direct the Respondent Authorities set-aside the lvlutation (change of name) proceedings in favour of the Respondent no.5 and to issue Digital passbook in favour of the Petrtioner in respeot of the lands in S..no.87'llC/i (part) to an extent of Ac.2-04 Guntas, situated a. Mupparam Village, Dharmasagar lvlandal, Warangal Urban District (Erstwhile Warangal District). lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Couri may be pleased to direct the Responcent nos.2 to 4 to issue Digitat passbook in favour of the Petitioner in respect of the lands in sy.no.871/c l1 @ail to an extent of Ac.2-04 Guntas, situated at Mupparam Village, Dharmasagar Mancial, Warangal Urban District (Erstwhile warangal District), pending disposat of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI K.BUCHI BABU Counsel for the Respondents No.1to4 : Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.5 : SRI K.SUNIL GOUD The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.18551 OF 2O2O ORDER: This Writ Petition is liled seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in deleting the name of Bulya Mallesh lrom the Pattadar and possession columns and entering the name ol the 5th responclent in respect of lanci in Sy. No. 87 1lC/l to an extent of Ac. 1.02 guntas, sitr-ratcd at Mupparam Village, Dhannasagar Mandal, Warangal lJrban District (erstwhile Warangal District), rvithout issr-rir-rg any notice and despite the petitioner's pending rt'prescntation d.atecl 27.O8.2O2O to the respondetrt authorities, as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to Scctions 5 and 9(1)(a)(i) of the A.P. Rights in Lanci and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 197 l; and consequently, to direct the respondent authorities to set aside the mLitar-ion (change of name) proceedings in favour of the 5th respondent zrnd to issue a digital Pattadar Passbool< in favour of the petitioner in ['aqc 2 of8 - respect ol land in Sy. No. 87 I /C/1 (part), to an cxtent of Ac.2.O4 guntas, situatcd at Mupparam Villagc, Dharmas;egar Mandal, Warangal Urban District (erstwhile \Varangal District) .

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner subrnits that the 3,d respondent, after hearing the appeal filed by one Bup'a Bala I{omuraiah, vide proceedings Rc. No. A/2488 l2O 15, dated O6.t1.2OI7, set aside the order passed by the 4th respondent, having found that the proccdurc contemplated under the ROR Act u,as not followcd in respcct of land to ax extent of Acs.2.04 guntas in Sy. No. 87 L /8, Mupparam Village, Dharmasagar Mandal, which had been issued in favour ol the unoflicia] respondent. The matter was remanciecl back to tl-re 4th respondent for a de novo r:nquirv and the appeal rvas accordingly dismissed.

3. Thereaftcr, the 4th respondent, vide proceedings No. B/46/2OlB, dated 26.O2.2Ot8, conclucted an cnquiry an<1 cancelled the pattadar passbooks carlicr l'agc -l ol'll issued in favour of the writ petitioner lor the said extent of Ac. 2.O4 gtntas in Sy. No. 87 llB, situated at Mupparam Village, Dharmasagar Mandal. [t was lurther observed that, since the land in question is ancestral property, it had been divided into two equal shares-Ac.

1.02 guntas in favour of Bulya Bala I(omuraiah, S/o Late Bayanna, and Ac. I.O2 guntas in favour ol Buyya Mallesh, S/o Late Bayanna.

4. He submits that, since the matter r,t'a s reman<led by the 3'd respondent, the 4th responclent/Tahsildar ought to have conducted a de novo enquiry, as directed' However, without complying with those dircctions and without issuing any notice to the petitioner, ths {Ltt respondent unilaterally passed the impugned proceedings dated 26.O2.2OIa. Aggrieved by the same' the petitioner submitted a representation to the 4'h respondent on 27.O8.2O20. Despite receipt of the said representation, no action has been taken by ths {ttr agc,l of ll - respondcrlt. Hence, the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court to pass appropriate orders

5. C)r-r lhc other harrd, Sri I{. Sunil Goud, learned counsel altpearing on behalf of the 5,h responclent, submits Lhat thc impugned proceedings p:rssed by the 4tl. rcspondent are in accordance with law and were issued aller conducting an enquiry, not only by the 4tr, respondent himsclf but also upon examination of thc material piaced bclore him. Pursuant to this, necessary instructior-rs were issued to the Village Revenue Officer for compliance with the directions of the 4rh respondent Hc further submits that only after conducting a detailed enquirv :rnrl upon receipt of the report from the Village Revenuc Officer, the 4LI\ respondent passecl the impugneci proceedings. He finatly contends that rcmitting the matter back to the 4rh resporrdent rvould amount to eLn abusc of the process of law.

6. Sri Sahas Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader rcltlcsenting the learned Governmenl_ pleader for Page 5 ol8 Revenue, upon instructions, submits that based on the order passed by the lr.cr lssp6nclsnt vide proceedings No' A/24BBl2ol5, dated 06.ll-2017, the 4th respondent conducted a detailecl enquiry and, upon finding that both parties are entitled to equal shares' passed necessary proceedings incorporating their names He lurther submits that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that no enquiry was conducted by the 4'h respondent prior to passing the impugnecl proceedings dated 26.O2-2O18, is misconceived, and accordingly, he seeks dismissal ol the completel-v u,rit petition 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learnecl counsel for the unofficial respondent No. 5, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, and u'ithout expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the 4tr' respondent to issue notices to the petitioner and all l'agc (r ol8 - concerned, including the 5,n respondent hcrein, CAtlSC denouo en(luiry, afford them an opportunity of hearing, and pass appropriate orders strictiy in accordance with law, els e xpe ditioLlsly AS possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks frorn the date of reccipt of a copy of this order B. With the above direction, this Writ petition is disposed o1'. 'lhcre shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. To //TRUE COPY// SD/. K. BHAVANI SWAMY S TANT REGISTRAR N OFFICER District. I elangana, Hyderabad. 1 The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secre 2. The District Collector, Warangal Urban, at Hanamkonda. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hanamkonda Division, Warangal Urban 4. The Tahsildhar, Dharmasagar Mandal, Warangal Urban District. 5. One CC to SRI K.BUCHI BABU, Advocate. IoFUCI 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana. 7. Two CD Copies. at, State of BSK /e HIGH COURT DATED:0210912025 'i,i,iI5 i* !,s s6 ,,.) ORDER WP.No.18551 of 2020 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1 7 !t' 1D