✦ High Court of India · 02 Jul 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 02 Jul 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
02 Jul 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
2,092 words

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cirr u nstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court n ay be pleased To suspend proceedings 81112212008 dI. 24- 03- 2008 issued bv I re 3rd respondent, and enquiry report clt. 19- 03- 2008 of the respondents 4 ard 5, pending the above writ petition,in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI HARI KISHAN KUDIKALA Counsel for the Respondents No.1to5 : ASST. GP FOR REV|:tlUE Counsel for the Respondents No.6to11 : The Court made the lbllowing: ORDER *:- -..:ry ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18571 of 2025 This u'rit petition is filed sccking follorvitrg relief 'For the reasons stated in thc accornP.ini'ing afl-idavit, it is thcrcfor. l)rit-\ed tllat this IIorr'ble Court may be pleased to lssLlc an order/direction or zrrl\' al)l)ropriatc t r-il , rnor.c particularly ()ne in thc nattlre of WRI'I' OF MANDAMUS, declaring tlre action of the Respondents 4 & 5 conductcd enquirl'on 19 O3-20OII in Sr'.Nos 219, 22O,225 & 228 srtuated at Kothapally Revenue Villagc, Anurnula N'latlrlrtl. Nalgond't Distri(:1, \\rthout causirlg nolice to the petitionr:r in rcspe('1 ol llr( l)etition('r' agricullure lands to arl extent of Ac o 2l % gts, irr Sv No 22u/ti, Ac'o 1'1 gts itr S\ No.2l9lLi, Ac.0.06 gts rr.r 51 .No.220/A at.rd Ac. I.l7 '/. gts rrl Sr'.No.22'5,/VU, antl issue<l lrroceecli[rgs vrclt'R/ |l22l2OOa, dt. 24 03 200{3 b1' the 3rtt rcspon(lcnt on the basrs ol tire Respon(l(itrts 4 & 5 rcPort (lt l9 03 2O08, as illcg,al, itrIritran'ancl (--ouft-art lo larv artrl violartion ofprinciPk:s clf DaIural-ittstict: zutcl c otrsctlLtr'iltl\ s(]lttllg asi<lt-' ll.rc Pr-oceedings victc B/ I 12212OO8, dt. 24-O3 2008 isstrcrl br thc 3'd r-cs})on(lcnl ancl enrluirl' rcport of the responclelrts rl & 5 dt. l9 03 2008, in llle intercst o[justice and ltass such othcr ot(lct-or orclcrs as titis llotr'lrlt Court urat- decDr fit ancl p|oper irt the circumstances of tl-te case."

2. lt is stated that petitioner is the absolutc o\\rncr 21nd possessor of land zrdmeasuring Acs. 0.21 'Z guntas in Survcv No.22U/ U, Acs 0. l4 guntas in Survcy No.219i U, Acs. 0.06 guntas iu Survev No.22O/A atrcl Acs. l. l7 ,1 guntas in Sun'ey No.225/VU, situeltecl at Kothzrpallv Ret'etrttc Village, Anumula Mandal, Nalgonda District (for short, 'the srtb.iect lands'), having acquired the same through family oral parlition ancl thc petilioner's name \rras mutated in the revenue records and pattadar passbool< and title cleed was also issued to the peLitioner uide No.V1287 l2 under tl-rc provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 197 I (for short, 'the ROR Act, 1971') and ncu' pattadar passbook and tille I-- =:ffl*'"s,#.:: 2 CVBR,.,. W.l:'.No.18671 of 202.> '-., dcctl rvas also rssr-rcd to thc pctitioncr uide 'I28().' ) 19l,t171 and I(hatrr No.(rO2 dated 13.) ).2022 undcr the provisions of t1 r' 'li:lang:rn:r Rights irr Lantl iLncl Pi.]ttzr,1:u Passbooks Act, 2O2O (for- short, 't l c ll()ll Act, 2020') anrl the pctrtroncr is, r':rrsing crops like grccn gram, red r, , nr, jarvar etc., in thr' sub jr'ct lancls. I1 is lllrther stiltcd rhat when rcsp, r r,lun t Nos.6 to I I irrc ir-rtt rlcring u'itlr tlrc subjecL Iar..cls of thc pctitioner, l( \r'irs collstraincd t() filc ir srrit yide,().S:, No. 13Lr OI'20 I0 or1 thc l'ilc ol f'rin,, 1; rl ,It.rnior tlivil .)r,rdgt: at M irr,arla.,uci:r {irr'pcr-pctu:rl in.jr:nction and subseqlr,'r tl-v the said suit u,as transk'rred to llrt' (lor:11 ol' .Jutnior CiviI Jttdgc rl Niclerm:rnoor an<] rcnr-rmtrered :rs ( ).S.No.15 ol 2O15 anci the saici ;rtr1 is pcnding lol- considerertion. ll is further sLated thal. rcsponder i No. 1O has fik:d zrn applir:zrtion rn tlrl' said suit to receive thc docur: r: rts of par-rchzlnllmrL conclrtr:tcd br' llrc thcn Deputv Tahsicllar, Anumulir i:nd pahanies lor the slrbc.jt:( lancJs rrrrl pctitiolirl' \\'as not an,are of ,r,' szrid panch:rnzrrn:r concllrctcd br tlri' tl'rcrr Deptrtl Tahsildar and lhe Ir'r tion,'r \\,as lrot e\,er, issuctl zrny noti :t l-,cfore conducting any circluiry in rr spc<:L of tl-re sr-rb.jccL lands. The gricv:lncc ol Lhc petitioner is that ba:;irrg on the report o1' responclent Nos..l iurcl 5, thc thcn Tahsildar, Anr r:ulzr has issucd thc irnpr-tgncd procct:rlinq,s uide Blli22l2OO8 datcd 2.1 (13.2008 urhercin thc Villergc' Rei'enuc O l'[icer, Iiothzrpally Village Sivar u.a ' ( [irooted to entcr the narne of one Mr'3lravath Vali ln possessor column. r.ithout issuir]g an1, noticc or opport rnitv to the pctrtioner. Hence, the plls, nt r,r,r'it petiLiorr. i 3 CVBR..I W.P.No.18671 of 2025

3. Considererl the submissions of tl-rc learne d counscl for the pctirioner anrl learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue zlppe:rrirlg for rcspondent Nos.1 to 5 and with their conscnt, this writ pctitiol) is bcing disposecl at tl)e aclmission stagc. In vierv of thc nature o[ relief sortgllt lor itt tl-ris rvrit petition, issuance of noticc to respondent Nos.6 to 11 is clispensed ivith.

4. A carelul rcading o[ the impugned proceedtngs u[de B I 1 122 l2OO8 clated 24.O3.2OO8 $'oulcl reveal that the D(] putY Tal-rsildar-, Anr.rrnr_rla Manclal, Nalgonda District has conducted pant:hanama ill rcspcct ol r l-rc subject l:rncls (,hcrein it is reported that one Meghavath vali $'as ir-t possession ol t.he subject land for about 30 years and doing cultivation ancl hcncc, namc- of Meghavath vali can be entered in the possessor colunln and Tal'rsilclar, Anumula Village Revenue Officer directed the Village Rcvenue officer, Kotl-ratpall1. village sivar to enter the name of one Meghavath Vali in posscssor colutnn, wi[hout issuing any t-totice or opportunity to thc petitrorrer uirle impugncd proceedings No.B/ 1l22l2OOB dated 24'O3'2OO8'

5. Aclmitteclly, the State Government as a policy decision has discontinued the pahani patrikas from the year 2016 and thcre is no possessor column in any of the revenue records to record the nature ol thc lands and its classification or particular person's name in the possessor column. [n the present case, the impugned proceedings of the Tahslldar '.. 4 CVBR, ,, W.l'. No.18671 of 2025 arc (lated 24.0: .2O08 arld the prcseilt \vrit petition ( .r.ne to be filcd by thc pclitioncr n('arl- irltcr:r pcriod of 17 r,ears

6. 'l'frc IIon'blc Suprcrrc CourL, n,hilc (1, ir rng s,ith the issut' relatrng to Lu.rclrLc ck'lir1, ;1161 lacl-rcs, in tl-rc casc of St:rte of Maharashtra v. Digambarl, o1ls:r',;t'tL :rs tr n cler: "A thr(r,lurlg. flench ol {lris (lourl rn Matraraslrtr:r -j1i tc Iload Tr-ansport Coll)orilLion r SIr-i B:rlrrrurt Rcgular Nlotor Sct'r,rce. AIn r. rtr & Ot-s. [1969 (1) SCIR 803], r --ir,r'iilc.l tl.rc sard pr-irrciplc of laches or un(lr c lcLr',' as that u,hich ir1r1;licrl rn err:rr:Lst: oI ll,rucr Ll thc Illgh Court un(] Arlicle 226 o[ tL'e CoDslrtullof llt( lelor.(', ,.rlrcrc ir llrgh Oourt irt cxerc| r r[ its lrorver vcsted un(ler /"r'ticic :2.2() oI lh( Constrtuliolr issues a clirc<'t r orrlcr or-utit lor granttnll relrr'- 1o a I)c|soD in<'l'.rrling a citizcr-t \\irrr, lt (onsidering his discnrrll(rnrrnt lnl such rcliel duc to lris blanrr: lolthv (,rr( ucl ()l utrduc delar' or- lerr:hr:s i r ,'lirirrril)E! tlrc sarn<:, sLrch a direction, oL li r or wr-iL becomes LuisustaLnal)lc ir:i that not ma<le .jrrrliciousll arnd rcasor r'r \ in e:{ercise of lts soun<1 lLrdrc ai (lls(:retion. l)Lll as tlrat rrade arbitrarilr'. XXX 'l'hus, rrlrc[ tlr'\\rt petilroirer (r'csllonclent here) \as gurt, oI lirclres or ttr-rdue Cclay ir alrl.rroircirng thr: Ilrgh Coult, thc principle ol l..lLcs or undur-' delal' acl',.er-lccl tc ;,lrove. discntitle(l tllc qrrt petitioner r":spon(lcnt herc) for discr:ctrorlilr , r < lrcf rrndcr Articlc 226 of tire Constitutior [' rnr ttre High Court, parlicLrlaLrl_r, \\rr('lr virtllall) no atlornl)t hacl bccD rnade lr' , rc \\'r'it petitioner to ex1>lair Irrs rlirrrrr u.ortlr\ cor-rrluc( ol Lrnduc delay or ltr hr s. 'li'.c High Court, thcrelbrc, u rs rlhoilr lrong in granting rcliclin relatior' 1(.inqruring into the allegat()n .tn(l ltlanting colrpcnsation for hrs land alk-'11, r' to hzrve been used for scirrcrt\ rc]rcl roarl uorks in thc \ear 1971 72......."

7. lr-r thc r':Lse of Mrinomy Maity v. Chhanda Koley and others2, the Hon'ble Supr-curc Court observcd as under: 1 (1995) SUPP I SCI.I 2 (2024) 4 SCII 50.; '.::.,.,<.\i*1{,*r'{1'' 5 CVBR, J W.P.No.18671 of 2025 "'lbis Court time and again has held that delav dcfcats equity. Delav or laches is one of thc factors rr,l.rich should be born in mind by the High Court r.thile exercising discretionary, pou,t'rs under Artrcle 226 of the Constltution of tndia. Irr tr given case, the High Court maY refuse to invoke its extraorclinary pou,ers if laxitl on the part of the applicant to assert his right has allolL,ed thc causc oI action to drift a$ a1, and attempts are rnade subsequently to rekittdle the la|sed cause of acli.rrr"

8. In vier,"' ol the above discussion, the writ petition filed by thc petitioner is misconceived and is liable to be dismissecl. It is needless to state that the obscnations macle by this Court in this orclcr are confined only for the purposc of clisposal of this u,nt petition. Horvever, if the petitioner is aggrrcve d by the impugned proccedings No. B/ 1 122 / 2OOB dated 24.03.2008 issued b1' the Tahsildar, Anumula, he can agitatc the validity or oLhenvisc of the said impugned order in any o[ the civiL proceedings ar-rd the saicl ci"'il proceedings has to be decided independentil' r.',,ithout being influcnced by the observations made in this writ petition.

9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no ordcr as to costs Miscellancous applications pending, if any, shall stan+g-lgsed -- SD/- T. SRINIVASA REDDY S STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/i SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRI HARI KISHAN KUDIKALA, Advocate. IOPUC] 2.TwoCCstoGPFoRREVENUE,HighCourtfortheStateofTelangana Two CD CoPies u,,'V BSK PVL - -i,r'r'.a-::.rl,.x:*? J. !.,/ i: 11 '- t-: \. .,-':-.:-----'.\ :j:- .l(, -.r.: ? 4 tti ?!m I i,i t- .,. - \.--r.--j-- l-,,:1 , i HIGH COUR]- DATED:0210't12025 ORDER WP.No.1867'l of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS / r' { 7 //o {

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