The High Court · 2025

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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of lr,4andamus, to declare the action of the respondent No.4 in not granting the succession to the petitioner in respect of the,an extent of Ac 1- 20 Guntas of agricultural land comorised in survey No. 179140137 situated at Ekvaipally village, IVludven village, Kadtal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent No.4 to issue pattadar pass book in favour of the petrtioner to the extent of his share in the subject property. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pass orders directing the respondent No.4 to consider the representation dated 18-01-2022, 18-1-2021 pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BATHINI UPENDAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 4: SRI HINGOLEKAR RAKESH KUMAR, AGP FOR SRI K.MURALIDHAR REDDY, GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6: - The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI .ruSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITICIN I{o.28482 of 2422 ORDER: The present writ petition is hlecl by the petitioner under .Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the na.ture of vrrit of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No.z[ in not granting succession to the petitioner in res;pec't of the agricult.ural land to an extent of Ac. 1.20 Gts., in Sy.No.179l4ol37 situated at Ekv;ripally Village, Mudven Village, Kadtal trrlandal, Ranga Reddy District as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondent No.4 to issue pattadar passbook in his favour in respect of the said la.nd.

2. Heard Sri Bathini l-lpender, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Hingolekar Itakesh Kumar, leirned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of learned Government Pleader for Revbnue Sri K.Muralidaar Reddy. In-spite of issuance of notice, none appeared for the resJrondent Nos.S ald 6.

3. The learned counsel lirr the petitioner submits that the petitioner's father, Late Sri Ramai.ah, was assigned agricultural land admeasuring Ac. 1-2O guntas in S,y No.i79l40137 of El<vaipally Village, Kadtal Mandal, Ranga Reddy Disb:ict. After his demise, the petitioner -- Pagc 2 of ,l and respondent Nos.s and 6, being legal heirs, continued in joint possession and cultivation of the land. However, respondent No.S unilaterally obtained succesision and secured pattadar passbook and title decd by suppressing fac ts, vide File No.B I 1246 I 20 I 7 dated l,l.l2.2Ol7. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before respondent No.3, who, by order dated r)6.05.2019 in File No.A2l432/2019, cancelled the said passbook an(:[ title deed and remanded the matter to the respondent No.4 to conduct a de nouo enquiry. Despite this, the authorities have not acted on the petitioner's representations dated

18.01.2021 and 18.O1.2022, s,:eking joint succession and mutation. The petitioner, belonging ,o il weaker section and dependent on agriculture, is left without remelll, as respondent No.4 has failed to act. (a) Learned counsel fol the petitioner further submits that the appellate arLthority, instead of C,eciding the matter on merits, remanded the case to the Tahsildar for conCucting a de nouo enquiry and to pass fresh orders in accordancc wirh the rules. The earlier orders dated

06.05.2017 u,ere vacated ;rnd lhe Tahsildar, Kadthal Mandal was directed to restore the original r:nquiry pertaining to the land in Sy. No. 179 I 40 I 37 standing in the nerme of Jengila Ramaiah, S/o Masaiah, who is the Iather of the petitior)er and the original assignee mentioned in the pattedar column No. r3. 'lhe possession column was directed to remain unc^ranged until dis:osrrl of the remanded case and passing of i'age J of4 the revised orders. Pattedar passb,rok and title deed irrsued, if a.ny, in the name of Jenigala Yadaiah were i sr-, ordered to be crmcelled. 4 . The learned Assistant Gcvernment Pleader submits that detailed proceedings have been cond.rcted before the 3.d respondent and the matter is presently penrlir g for de nouo enquiry before the 4m respondent. Since the orders ,rf succession suffers [rom procedural and material irregularities, the san.re tiave been set aside and unless a de nouo enquiry is conducted, the truth cannot be elicited. The present writ petition is nothing but miscon<:eption ald hence, the same is liable tobe dismissed.

5. This Court, upon h:e rin;E the rival contentions of both sides and upon perusal of the r:ral,:rie I on record, is of the considered opinion that since the impugne<l succession proceedings have already been set aside and a de nouo enqui:y u-as ordered on 1i2.09.2019 by the

3.d respondent to be conducted by l-he 4th respondent and as nearly six years have elapsed since then, il- is appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition. Accordinglll', the 4ttt respondent is directed to conduct the de nouo enquiry in a,:cordance with law, by issuing notices to all the concerned parties and,:ff,.rrding them suflicient opportunity of hearing and to pass appropria:-,: ,:rders preferably u,ithin six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy cf thi:; order. I !- I'age J ol-1

6. With the above lirections, thjs writ petition is disposed of. N,l costs. Interlocutory appl;cat o;t s, if anY pending, stand closed. To SD/. SRI T. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department ri Hyderabad, State 2 3 4 5 6 of Telangana The District Collector, Ranga Reddy Districl The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur Division, Ranga Reddy District. The Tahasildar, Kadtal lvlandal, R.R.Dist. One CC to SRI BATHINI UPENDAR, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUl

7. Two CD Copies PSK. BM Ft_ HIGH COURT DATED:2510912025 ORDER WP.No.28482 of 2022 i- : iri. - o (_) 1 J Fi8 z{i.t: ',: :\. DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ..P?4 4O #s"