Boorgula Surendranath Yadav v. 1. The State of Telangana

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 direction, more pa(icularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, call for the records in the impugned order Dt.15l6l2}21 Sf lD5l164l202'1 in Case No.81292812015 on the file of Special Tribunal Ranga Reddy District., as arbitrary, unco n stitutional, Unjust, Unfair, against the principles of Natural justice, illegal, and void and further the Hon'ble Court maybe pleased to direct the Thasildar lbrahimpatnam to issue new Digital Pass book in favour of the petitioner in respect of the land Ad.Mes.Ac.0-08 Gts in Sy.No.41and land Ad.mes. Ac.0-32 Gts in Sy.No.308 of Pocharam village of I rahimpatnam Mandal, R.R.District. l.A.NO:1 OF 2021 Petition Under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the ; .cumstances stated in the affidavit frled in support of the petition, the High Co - 1 may be pleased to suspend the rmpugned order Dt.1516l 2021 passed in Cas,r No. STlDslj64l2}21 in 81292812015 on the file of Special Tribunal Ranga F r ddy District, pending disposal of writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.LAXMAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : SMT S.SRAVAN t {1, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI G.SRIKANTH The Court made the following ORDER I SK, J W.P.No.24553 of 202 1 IN THE HTGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.24553 of 2O2L Date:O1.12.2o25 Betr,r,ee n: Boorgula Surendranath Yadav And . . . Petitioner

1.The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secre[ary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 4 others. ...Respondents. ORDER: Heard Sri M. Laxman Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondent Nos.l to 4 and Sri Srikanth Gunti, learned counsel for the respondent No.S and perused the material on record. 2 SK, J W t'. ,l 24553 of 2O21

2. 'I'his rnrit petition is iiled questionir I : the order passed by the Special Tribunal, Ranga Rcr dy District in Case No.Bl2928l2015 ST/D r I 16412O2r dated 15.06.2021 as illegal and arbitrar), : Ld ro direct the respondent No.4-Tahsiidar to issue r ew Digital Pass Book rn favour of the petitioner in re : pect ol the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.() 08 gts in Sy.No.41 ar-rd Ac.0-32 gts in Sy.No.308 ;ituated at Pocharam Village, Ibrahimpatnam Manc al, Ranga Reddy District.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner s - lrmits that the petitioner and another were jointly pur:hased the agriculture dry land admeasuring to arr extent of Ac.O-08 gts out ol Ac.0-17 gunts 1n Sl . l1o.41 ald Ac.0-32 gts in Sy.No.3O8, total Ac. 1-00 gts ;ituated at Pocharam Village, Ibrahimpatnam Man,; a1, Ranga * Reddy District vide sale deed Document No '.',lT8l2OO3 26.05.2003 of the Sub-Regist- rr Ofhce, Ibrahimpatnam lrom the respondent No .5. After 3 SK, J W.P.No.24553 of 202 I purchase of the property, the concerned Tahsildar has issued mutation proceedings in favour of the petitioner in File No.D l3929l2oOa dated 30.o9.2Oo4 and subsequently the name of the petitioner and another were incorporated in the revenlle records for the suit schedule property and pattadar passbooks and title deeds were also issued in their favour by the revenue authorities. Thereafter, the co purchaser has sold his share of the property to the petitioner and in view of the same, the petitioner made application for mutation of the records and at that point of time, the respondent authorities have stated that as per Dharani Portal, the property was in the name of the respondent No.S and refused to mutate the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner made application before the respondent No.4, who in turn has issued notice for conducting enquiry vide Lr. No.B12928/2015 dated 30.10.20 15 for correction of entries in the revenue records. Pending that 4 SK, J W.l' ,,1 r 24553 of 2O2l proceedings. the Telangana Rights in ,ands and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 197 1 was iurl )nded and 'lclangala Rights in Lands and Pattaclir Passbooks Act, 2O2O came into force and the said application made by the petitioner was transmitted tcr rhe Special Tribuna-l. He further submits that : re Special Tribunal, without issuing any notice to rli : petitioner as well as the unofhcial respondent di:; nissed the application o[ the petitioner on the grorr-d that the Tahsiidar has no power to correct the revcr ue records and requested to allow the writ petition by setting aside the impugned proceedir-rgs.

4. In spite of lapse of more than four years, the official respondents have not filed countel c enying the averments made by the petitioner in the wlt petition.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel ap tearing for the respondent No.5 basing on the courr ( r submits that there is no dispute with regard to p rrchase of 5 SK, J W.P.No.24553 of 2021 lands by the petitioner and the respondent No.5 has no objection for mutation ol the records in favour of the petitioner for his purchased lands

6. After hearing both sides and perusal of the record, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is claiming mutalion of the records basing on the registered documents and earlier, the respondent authorities have issued mutation proceedings in lavour of the petitioner as well as the other purchaser and also issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds and now the petitioner made application for correction of entries. In view computerization of the revenue records in Dharani Portal, the name of vendor of the petitioner i.e., the I t respondent No.S is showing as pattadar in spite of the petitioner purchased the suit schedule iand under I I registered sale deed. In view of the same, the impugned order passed by the Special Tribunal is l I i 6 SK, J W I' i 24.553 ol 2021 arbitrary and iliegal and the same is liaL I : to be set asicle 7 hr vieu' ol the above finding, the Wr: r pctition is clisposcd of by setting aside the impugnr C order in Case No.B/2928 /2015 ST/Dr; t 16,+ l2O2l dated 15.06.2021 and the matter is remanr r:cl back to the respondent No.4 for conducting enqui -' and pass appropriate orders for correction of entr ()s in the revenuc records lor the suit schedlrlr property purchased by the petitioner within threr: l)) rnonths lrom the date of receipt of a copy of thi j order. No order as to costs

8. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, per-rcrrg in this u,1it pe tition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. ', SRINIVASA REDDY ASiI iISTANT REGISTRAR \ SECTION OFFICER To ! t \y SA BS 1 2 3 4 6 7 o The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department Secretirr Secretariat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy, Ranga Reddy Di; The Revenue Divisional Officer, lbrahimpatanam Divisi, Ranga Reddy District. The Thasildar, lbrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy, Ranga i Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the S i Hyderabad. [OUT] One CC to SRI tr/.LAXII/AN RAO, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI G SRIKANTH, Advocate (OPUC) Two CD Copies at Buildings, rict, Ranga Reddy n, at Turkyamjyal, :ddy District. te of Telangana at :ffi HIGH COURT DATED:01 11212025 ORDER WP.No.24553 ot 2021 -.-:-t-'-\. r E Sii. { ( o() 2I rAll 202[ ?' * DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS.