High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, 2. The Special Tribunal, [\/ahaboob Nagar District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahaboob Nagar Division, Mahaboob Nagar 4. The Tahsildar, Bhoothpur Mandal, Mahaboob Nagar District. 5. Sri. Chinna Jangaiah, S/o. Choudappa, aged about 52 yrs, Occ. Agriculture, 6. Sri. Pentaiah, S/o. Choudappa, aged about 50 yrs, Occ. Agriculture , Rl/o. 7. S. Kamalakar, S/o. keshaiah, aged about 64 yrs, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H.No. 3-5-32/9, Keshava Nagar Colony, Near '16 Shutters, Hyderaguda, Rajendra Nagar [Vlandal, Ranga Reddy District, 8. S. Surekha, Wo. Late. Prem Kumar aged about 47 yrs, Occ. Housewife, R/o. H.No.3-5-32/9, Keshava Nagar Colony, Near l65hutters, Hyderaguda, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 9. S. Raj Kumar, S/o. Pedda Maisaih, aged about 54 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.3-5-3219, Keshava Nagar Colony, Near l65hutters, Hyderaguda, Rajendra Nagar Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Ravulapally Village Bhoothpur Mandal, Mahaboob Nagar Diskict ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the orders of the Special Tribunal, Mahaboob Naghar District in CaseNo.Dl114212021,(ROR file No. BiROR/3503/2020 ) dated 1510612021 in dismissing the appeal filed under Section 5 (5) of the then T.S. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, '1971 , as being illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violatior of principles of natural .lustice and contrary to the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act,2020 (hereinafter referred to ;as Act No.9 of 2020), aparl from being violation of Articles 21 and 300-4 of the constitution of lndia and set aside the same and remand back the case to the office of respondent No.2 to conduct fresh trial by opportunity may be given to the petitioner nor his counsel lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under se.ction 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in suoport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the orders of the special Tribunal, Mahaboob Nagar District in case No D1t142t2021, (ROR file No B/ROR/3503/2020) dated 1510612021 pending disposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DASARI KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5to9:-- The Court made the following: ORDER 1 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26224 of 2o22 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: "....to issue a utrit, order or a direction more particularQ1 one in the nature of uit of mandamus declaing the ord.ers of the Special Tibunctl Mahoboobnagar Distict in Case No.Dl/ 142/2O21 ROR File No.B/ ROR/ 3503/ 2O2O dated 15/O6/2O21 in dtsmissing the appeal filed under Section 5 (5) of the then T.S Rights in LcLncl and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 as being illegal, arbitrar!, unreasonabLe, uiolation of pinciples of natural justice and contrary to the prouisions of the Telangano Rights in Lctnd and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2O20 hereinctfter referred te as Act No.9 of 2O2O oport from being uiolotion of Articles 21 and 3OOA of the Constitution of India and set aside the same and remand back the case to the olfice of respondent No.2 to conduct fresh trail by opportunitA mag be giuen to the petitioner nor his counsel. . .. "

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

3. The petitioner herein along with one T. Radhika filed an appeal vide No.B/ROR/3503/2020 under Section 5 (5) of the Telangana State Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 before respondent No.3-the Revenue Divisional Officer, questioning the entries made in the revenue records in favour of respondent Nos.5 to 9 in respect of land admeasuring Ac.6 2 15 guntas in lSy.No.l11/1 situated at Ravulapaliy Village, Bhoothpur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District and pending consideration o i the same, the Government has repealed the Act, 197 | and enacted new Act called as "the Telanganra Rights in Land and PeLttadar Pass Books Act, 2O2O" (fot sh,crt 'Act, 2O2O'l and as per G.O.Ms.No.4 Revenue Department dated l2.O I .2021 , tl-rt: said appeal was transferred to respondent No.2-the Special Tribunal, Mahabubnagar District, and renumbered as Case No.D1/Ia2/2021; and the said appeal was dismissed vide order dated 15.06.2021. The grievance of the petitioner is that urithout serving any noticds and without providing an op,portunity of hearing to him, respondent No.2 has dismissed the said appeal, therefore, prays this (lourt to set aside the order dated 15.06.20|21 in Case No.D1/ l42l2Ct21 (ROR File No.B/ROR/3503/2020) passed by respondent No.12 and remand back for fresh trial by providing an opportunitl' of hearing to him.

4. Learned t;ounsel for the petitioner contended 1.hat the properties mentioned in the sale deed and the rnutation effected in favorrr of respondent Nos.S to 9 are different and distinct and therefore, the respondent-authorities Y 3 conferred with power to carry out necessary corrections as per the Rules framed under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 197 I (for short 'the Act, l97l'l and instead of exercising the said power, respondent No.2 has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner granting liberty to approach the competent Civil Court

5. A careful reading of the impugned order dated

15.06.2021 reveals that the names of respondent Nos. I and 2 I .\ are mutated in respect of the subject property by virtud of registered sale deed dated 19 .O4 .198L . The appellate authority has issued notices to the petitioner and has also taken into consideration of the entries in the revenue records before dismissing the said appeal. Since there are serious disputes with regard to the extent, identification, localization of the boundaries and the execution of the sale deeds and its genuineness in respect of the subject property, respondent No.2 appellate authority, has rightly stated that it does not have any power to examine the said issues; and the sarne are required to the adjudicated only after examination of the evidence of various records, wherein the names of the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 to 9 are recorded I I / 4

6. In vierl, of the above, this Court does not find any illegality, irregularitl, and warranting interference of the orders of the appellate authority under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accor<lingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequ,:I, the miscellaneous petitions ltending, if any, shall stand c1osed SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA REGISTRAR ASSI NT //TRUE COPY// il E OFFICER

1. One CC to SRl. llASARl KRISHNA REDDY, Advocate [OPUCI 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad IOUTI

3. Two CD Copies BM GJP To, 6 HIGH COURT DATED:2210112025 ORDER WP.No.26224 ot 2022 -a-'a -. :.' -:-.. (. 1t til ?w C.( a _ . rr.r ;i 1;,*+tD DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @cqvw