High Court · 2025

Gundu Pramita, H.No.3-5-1 11418/6, Raj l\4ohallah Shamsheerbagh, Hyderabad Gundu Srinivas, H.No.3-5-1 1 14, Raj tvlohallah Shamsheerbagh, Hyderabad Darni Srikanth Yadav, S/o. Late Lakshmaiah Aged about 23 years Occ Agricultural, R/o. Timmareddyguda (V), Shahbad (M), Rangareddy Dist, T.S.(St.) R8 is impleaded as per Court Order dated 1411212023 in lA No.1/2023' R8 is transposed as P2 as per C.O.dt. 04.02.2025 in lA No. 1/2025' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under A(icle 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be -!.--_-:_:-r!w pleased to issue zr writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or orders, Direction o- Directions to quash the proceedings of the special rribunal, Ranga Reddy Dist'ict in No.'1056/202i dated o31o712021 whereby it dismissed the Revision Petitirn filed by the petitioner on the grour d that delay without affording any opt'o lunity to the petitioner, by declaring th€ same as illegal and unsustainable and o issue a consequential direction to the Tribunal to hear and decide the Revrsion Petition No.ST/D1/1056/2021 on merits. lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 15'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed ir support of the petition, the High cour. may be pleased to permit to file additirrnal material papers and prays this Hor,ble court please to consider said mater;al papers as form part of main writ petition and to pass such other order or orden;. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition unde' section i 5'1 cpc praying that in the cir'umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High courr may be pleased to direct the 4th Respondent not to cause any further mutation in respect of the land in Survey No.151/Ai 2, of Dontanpally Village, Shgankarpally \/andal, Rangareddy District, pending disposal of the Writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section i 51 cpc praying that in the circ umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to REcElvE the docurnents (1) copy of FrR No.242 of 2024, dated 28.06.2024, Shankarpally PS., (2 ) copy of written Statement fired by th. Sth Respondent in o's.No.40 of 2023, (3) copy of counter fired by the sth Respondent in 0.S.No.40 of 2023, (a) Copy c,f pattadar pass book of R_5 (Manuat) (5) Copy of List of Documents filed by the Sth Respondent in o.s.No.40 of 2023, (6) copy of the ROR 1-B of R-Sand grass such other order or orders. lA NO: 4 OF 2025 ' Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioners to amend the main prayer as "to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, to quash the proceedings of the Special Tribunal, Ranga Reddy District in No.1056/2021 dated 03 O7.2021 whereby it dismissed the Revision Petition filed by the Fetitioners on the ground of delay without affording any opportunity of hearing, as illegal and unsustainable, and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent/District Collector, Ranga Reddy District to hear and decide the Revision Petition No. sT/D1/1056/2021 0n merits, in accordance with law" Instead of "to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Wrrt, Order or Orders, Direction or Directions to quash the proceedings of the Special Tribunal, Ranga Reddy District in No-1056/2021 dated o3to7l2o21 whereby it dismissed the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner on the ground that delay without affording any opportunity to the petitioner, by declaring the same as illegal and unsustainable and to issue a consequential direction to the Tribunal to hear and decide the Revision Petition No.ST/D1/1056t2O21 on merits" and pass such other order or orders- lA NO: 2 OF 2021 Between: Hyderabad 1 . Gundu Pramila, H.No.3-5-1 1141816, Raj lvlohallah Shamsheerbagh,

2. Gundu Srinivas, H No.3-5-'1 '1 14, Raj tt/ohallah Shamsheerbagh, Hyderabad ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT No.6&7 AND 1 2 J 4 5 6 Darni Ramulamma, W/o. Late Lakshmaiah Aged about 72 years, R'/o Timmareddyguda Village, Shahbad Mandal, Rangareddy District. State of Tetangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad District Cotlector, Rangareddy District. Addl. Collector, Rangareddy District Tahsildar, Shankarpally lvlandal Rangareddy District. Jangampet Manikreddy, Dontanpally Village Shankarpally It/andal, Rangareddy District. ,:=:::t==:-=r

7. Darni Srikanth Yadav, S/o. Late Lakshmaiah Aged rrbout 23 years Occ. Agricultural, lVo. Timmareddyguda (V), Shahbad (M), Rangareddy Dist., T.S.(St.) R7 in lA 212'l (RB in WP) impleaded as per Court Order, dated 14112123 in l.A.No.1/23 ...RESPONDENTS Petition uncler Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir:umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour. may be pleased to vacate the interim crder dated 01/09/2021 passed in l.A No 1 of 2021 in W.P No '1 9700 of 2021 and grant such other relief as it deems fit in the circumstances of the ca se. Counsel for the Pelitioner No.1 : M/s.CHANDRASEN LAW ()FFICERS Counsel for the Pelitioner No.2 : SRI M.VIVEKANANDA REt)DY Counsel for the Rer;pondents No.1to4 : GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Rer;pondents No.5&6 | -- Counsel for the Re:;pondents No.7&8 : SRI D.B.CHAITANYT\ The Court made thr: following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.197OO OF 2O2l ORDER This Writ Petitron is filcd under Article 226 ol tlle Constitution of India, seeking the follori'ing relief: ". . ... to issue cL u,trit of ceftiorai or any other appropiate turit, orcler ot orders, direction or directions to quash the proceeclittgs of the Special Tribunal, Ranga Redcly Disttict in No.1O56/202 I dated. 03.07.2O21 utlrcreltg it dismissed the Reu[sion Petitiott fitecl by the petitioner on the grotLnrl th(tt cletay tuithont affording ana opportunity to tlle petitiotter, by declaing the same as ittegal crrtcl uttsttstainable a nd to issue a conseqienttal clirectiott to the Tibunal to hear and clectle the Reuision Petition No.ST/Dl/ 1056/2021 on merits ancl pass such other order or orders "

2. Brief facts o-f the cctse are that the husband of petitioner No. 1 orvned an extcnt ol Ac.2.23 gunts of land in Sy No 15 1 /A/ 2 situated at Donlanpalll' village, Shankarpally Mandai' Rangareddy District. The husband of petitioner No ' 1 and his brother partitioned the land of their father and proceedings urere issued by the Deputy Tahsildar, Shankarpaliy Mandal, uide tn No.R/98/98, clated 05.O7.199 1 mutating their names in respect of the said lands and the sald land is the ancestral property of the husband of the petitioner No.1 and he was the absolute ou.ner of the said land. The husband of petitioner No 1 sold a\ ral, an extcnt of Ac.2.O0 ol land in favour of others under a : utll'..t l|'P.No.19700 OF 2021 registered sa13 deed and only an cxtent of Ac.O.2ll guntas of land relnalnecl u'itl-r him. Thc pahanies for the year 1999 20OO till 2OO4-2OOS st-Io\4,n thc said land in favour of he l-rusband of pctitioner No.1. Hor,r.ever, for the vear 2005-2006 1111 20 l0 201i, apart lrom th: name ol husbalci of petitioner No i, tl-re names of ut-t -official res;pondent Nos.5 to7 :rre shou.n in tlre Pattadar anci possession (lolumr-rs ol the Pahanis, rvhich \\,as l- appened due to the death ol the husbancl of pctitioncr No.1 in thc vcar 2007 r,r.ithout issuing any noticc to petitioner No.1

2. l. Petitior-re r No. t has no children and no breadu'inner to support her as she is residing urith h,:r brothcr in Timmareddt'guda village. In 2016, her brothcr d:scovered in thc re\/enue records that thc nalTles of the unoflic al respondents n ere shorvn in the pahanis Il.) respect ol Lhr surbject lar-rd. Subsequently she filed a rerrisior-r petitior bearing No DI/2670120 16, dated 25.O5.2OL6 before the .Joint Collector under Section 9 of the ROR Act, and the same h: s been pending before the Joint Collector for firre vears. After the constitution of the Special 'lribunal under the TS ROR Act,2O2'), the case u,as transferred to the Tribunal and rerrumbered as ST/DllIOStt/2O21 and the Tribunal dismissed tre petition ulde order dated OB.O2 .2021 holding that there ivcrc no reason s to -) F' I'I'.J WP.No.l9700 OF 2021 correct the entries- However, pursuant to the order of this Court in PIL Case No.20/21 dated 18.O3.2O21, the Tribunal once again I took up the case tls a revision and issue d notices to both the parties. On receipt of such notice, thc respondent No'S - Mr' Manik Reddy ncither attended the procecdings nor filed any counter. Respondent No.6 contested the case on the ground that they purchasecl an extenl of Ac.0 20 acres ol land from Mr.Manik Recldy under Registered Sale Deed No'1226 l2OO7, rlated 14.1.2.2OO7. and mr-ttation in their favour took place through proceedings No.B/ 1 178l2OOB, dated 29.07'2008 issued by the Tahsildar, Shankarpally. Thereafter, respondent No'6 gifted the same to respondent No-7 under Registered Gift Deed No.2447 12016, dated 26.05.2016, and mutation in favor of respondent No.7 took place ttrrough proceedings No.B/ 1890/20 16, dated 22.Oa-2O16. After perusing the relevant record and the material available on record, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal uide order dated O3'O7 2021' holding that the appeal is time barred and it has no power to entertain the same. Hence, the presenl Writ Petition'

3. Heard Ms.D.Ramulamma, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for 4 'ttl',.\ o, o o ofl ,lil Revenue app:arir-rg on behalf of respondcnt Nos. 1 to 4. Peruse d n' n. n, "., the maLerial rurerilable on record

4. LearrreC counsel for the petitioner suf,mits thaL the inrpugnecl or le r dated 03.O7 .2021 u,as passed bt. tl-re Tribunal in a mec:han, cal manner, dismissing the appeai as time ltarred u'ithout properl,r. examit-ring the matcrial on ;-ecord. Hc also submits thert the cntries in respect of the subjec t lar-rd in [avour of the unofficial respondents rn,ere madc ri.ithout arnv supportir-rg material do<:rrments and n ithout issuing notice to all the p:rrtics concerne<l ancl, thereforc, the question of lirrri-atior-r does not arise. Learnr.d counsel for the petitioners rrrlicd upon thc counter liled .ry the respondent No.5 u,hich reads as under: "lt is futther submitted that, cLs seen frorrt the paho.ni 2005 2O()G and exent of Ac.0.22 gts out of Ac.0.23 gts is recorcled in the nante ol 1. Sri Janqampe,.cL Marttlt Redcl:y es patta uide proceedings No.B/2500/05 dated 2'1 09.2OO5. But as uerified front the recorded the proc<,ed.ing does not peftains to DonthrurctpaLlq uillage. .4s uerified front the EC front I 991 to 2020 this satd Jangampeta Manik ReddA S/ o tstLl Reddg has rtctt. ourchased any land frorn Dctrni L armaialt and his n arne is wronglg recorded, in pahani. Furlher the scriC. Manilt Reddg S/ o BaL Reddy has so d out an extent of Ac.O.2O guntas in fauour of Guncl prameel W/o Balraj uide Regd.Doct.No.1226/2007 dated, 14.12.201)7 and her name Lt)as implemented in the reuetrue "ecords uide proceedings No.B/ 1 1ZB/ 2O0g dated 29 07.2OOB and an extent of Ac.O.02 gts tDcts record.e<l ;.n the name of Jnagampeta Ma.nik R:d.dg. ln turn Sm.t. Prameela fl o Balraj executed gift deed to an extertr of Ac.3.03 gts in Sy.NO.149 anc, 151 of I t ,rr.*".roroo oi'r[)', Donthapallg uillaqe in fauour f his son Si Gundu Siniuas S/o Botraj uicle reg.Doc.No.2447/2016 dated 26.05.2016 band name has been implemented in LRUP in the pahani for the year 20 1 9-2020. in view ol the above, learned counsel for the petitioners 5 submits that from the above, it is crystal clear that the name of husband of petitioner No.1 has been removecl due to the mistakes and errors made bv the respondent No'4' Hence, prays the Court to allorn' the writ petition, clirecting the respondent authorities concerned to correct the entries in the revenue record in respect of the subject land'

6. On the other hand, r'vhile opposing the u'rit petition, the learned Government Pleadcr for Revenue strongly submits that the counter filed by respondent No.4 cannot lorm the basis for the petitioner to establish l-rer case' He contends that the petitioner ought to have approached tl-re Civil Court for declaration of title and in the absence of such a declaration, the present proceedings under Articl e 226 of the Constitution are notmaintainable.Hefurthersubmitsthatsuclrquestionsof title cannot be decided in a \r'rit pctition ' He would further submit that the petitioners are covered with the limitation period as mandated under the Limitation Act and based upon the proceeclings issued by the Tahsildar in the name of respondent EYI'.J WI'.No.19700 OF 2021 No.7, who is bonofide purchaser of the propcrt_v. tom respondent 6 No.6 and the respondent No.7. \. ,i,,. \'

7. Learn,,-cl Assistant Governme nt Pleacle:- for Revenue submits th.rt after issuance ol notice ulton c.iamination and r.erificatron o- Llte records, the name of the pctitioncr has been dcleted tr-_r t'espondcl-rt no.4 and accordingll', ne:cssa11. countcr has been lileri :rnd hence, he seeks to pass appropriatc orders, in accot dan. t u ith lau'.

8. On lteru sal of the record discloses that the husbancj of the pctitioner No.I is the ou,ner of an extent of Acs 2.23 guntas in s1,.No.151/A/2 of Dontanpally Village, Shankzrpally Mandal, Ranga Redclv District, apart from thc lancl in other survev nurnbers of the said village. After selling an exte nt of Ac.2.00 of land throug[-r tu,o different registered sale deec s an cxtent of Ac.0.23 gunte s remained with the husband of petitioncr No. 1. Though the grahanres for the 1,ears 1999-2000 till 2OO4 and 2005 shou. th: narne of the husband of the petitioncr No. 1, the pahanies lor t're ycars 2005 2006 till 2OIO-2O11, apart lrom the name of hustrand of petitioner No. 1, the nam(,s of unofficial respondents .,r,e re also shown in pattadar a-rd possession colurmn of the said paharies. Aggrieved by the satne the revision petition lile d tr1, the petitioner No. 1 and on di;missal of tirc 'a..,i, EVV.J lyP.i'o.19700 0f 2021 revision filed by the petitioner No.1, pursuant to the order in Pil l Case No.20 of 2O2L, dated 18.03 .2021 the said Tribunal once again took up the matter and in spite of non production of link documents and mutation proceedings in favour of respondent Nos.6 and7, the Tribunal erred in dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner uide ordet dated O3'07'2021' only on the ground of clelay and that it has no po\\rer or jurisdiction to entertain the revision. g. Therefore, the impugned order dated 03'O7 '202L in No. 1056 of 2021, passed by the lcarned Special Tribunal, is set aside,andthematterisremandedtothelearnedTribunalfor fresh adjuclication on merits and disposal in accordance r'i'ith law, afler affording due opportunity of hearing to both parties'

10. With the above direction, the present Writ petttton 1S disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous Petitions, pending il any, shall stand closed. \ To, //TRUE COPY// SD/-K. BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANTREGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER '1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad

2. The District Collector, Rangareddy District. 3. The Addl. Collector, Rangareddy District 4. The Tahsildar, Shankarpally Mandal Rangareddy District. 5. One CC to M/s.CHANDRASEN LAW OFFICERS, Advocate. [OPUC] l ---rr---;liflFtt-'-i-*i" -. -'a: -. :/

6. One CC to liFll M.VIVEKANANDA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to (iP FOR REVENUE (TG) ,High Court for tl-e State of Telangana LOUT]

8. One CC to liF(l D.B.CHAITANYA, Advocate. [OPUC] 9 Two CD Copi:s BSK A,( Wcs HIGH COURT I DATED:2410912025 15 STA 0t1 ?[15 't t) r, ORDER WP.No.19700 of 2021 DISPOSING If,F THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0 7A \0