l\/asood Sved. S/o. late Saveed-ul-hassan v. The State of Telangana

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of wRlT oF MANDAMUS under Article 226 ot the constitution of lndia by declaring that action of the respondent for not considering the representation dated 27-6- 2022 made by the petitioner Request to upload the name of the Masood syed s/o late sayeed-ul-hassan in the Dharni portal to the land in survey no.B1 to the extent of 3 acres 05 guntas situated at Hameedulla Nagar Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. lncluding issuance of pattedar passbook in the name of the petitioner. And declare the action of the respondent no. 2 and 3 is totally illegal, and violates the principles of natural justice and against the provisions of Telangana rights in land and Pattedaar Passbook act, 2020. lncluding violation of article 300 of Constitution of lndia. IAN O:1OF 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 direct the respondent to consider the request made by the petitioner to upload the name of the Masood syed s/o late Sayeed-ul-hassan in the Dharni portal to thd land in survey no.81 to the extent of 3 acres 05 guntas situated at Hameedulla Nagar village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, lncluding issuance of pattedar passbook in the name of the petitioner till dispose of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SURESH SHIV SAGAR Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent No.4: - The Court made the following: ORDER n ORDER: HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION NO .30737 of 2022 This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is frled seeking the following relief: '...to issue a Wit order or direction more particttarly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMIIS under Article 226 of the Constitution of India bg declaing tllat action of the respondent for not consideing the ,.preteitation dated 27-6-2O22 mqde bA the petitioner Request to upload the name of the Masood syed s/o tate Sageed-ul-hassttn in tle 6hami portat to tie tand in surueg no.81 to the ertent of 3 acres 05 Wntcrs situated at Hameedulla nagar uttlage, Shamslruba.d Mandol' -Ranga reddg distict Inctuding issuance of pattedar passbook in the naie of the pettttoner And declare the actton of the respondent no 2 and 3 is t;tatlg illegal and uiolates the princtples of natural iustice an'd against tie pivisions of Telangana ights in land and Pattedaar PLssbook act 2O20 lncluding uiolcttion of articte 3O0 of Constitution of India...' It is the case of the petitioner that out of the total land

2. admeasuring Ac.B-OS gts in Sy.No.81 situated at Hameedullanagar Village, Shamshabad Mandai, Ranga Reddy District, owned and possessed by him, he sold an extent of Ac.5-0O gts to the respondent No.4 under registered sale deed bearing document No.l364 I 1992 dated 31.01.1992 arrd. mutation proceedings vide No-ROR/97 11992 dated 14.07.1992 was also issued. However, in the revenue records, instead of recording Ac.5-OO gts in the name of the respondent No'4 entire extent of Ac.B-OS gts was recorded in the pahanies from the year lgg2-93 onwards, due to clerical error. It is further case of the petitiorlerThat on the application submitted by him, the respondent \ 1 No.3 issued proceedings No.Dl922l2O10 dated lg.12.2OlO ordering for correction of entries in the pahanies from the year lgg2_g3 onwards in respect of iands in Sy.No.8l i.e, to enter the name of respondent No.4 to an extent of Ac.S-OO gts and balalce land to an extent of Ac.3-O5 gts in the name of petitioner. It is stated that challenging the said proceedings dated 18.12.2010, the respondent No.4 herein hled W.P.No.136 of 2011 on the lile of this Court and this Court vide order dated 18.02.2011 dismissed the said writ petition relegating the respondent No.4 herein to avail the alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Attapur. It is further stated that aggrieved by the said order dated

14.02.2011, the respondent No.4 filed Writ Appeal No.156 o{ 2012 and the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated I

27.04.2022 dismissed the writ appeal conlirming the order dated

14.02.2011 passed in W.P.No.136 of 2O11. It is also stated that the respondent No.4 filed a suit vide O.S.No.43g of 201O on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, seeking declaration of title and consequential injunction and in the said suit, the petitioner llled counter claim. It is further statecl that the said suit was dismissed for default and the respondent No.4 has filed restoration petition and the same is pending for adjudication. ( J

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though he submitted a representation dated 27.06.2022 to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 requesting to mutate his name in the Dharani Portal in respect of land admeasuring Ac.3-05 gts in Sy-No-Sl situated at Hameedua Nagar Village and issue pattadar pErssbook, till date, no action has been taken by the respondents.

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

5. As seen from the material placed on record, the respondent No.3-Tahsidar being the primary authority has issued proceedings dated 18.l2.2OlO to carry out necessary corrections duly incorporating the name of the petitioner to an extent of Ac'3-05 gts in Sy.No.8l. The said proceedings was assailed by the respondent No.4 in W.P.No.136 of 20 1 1 and the same was dismissed by this Court vide l8.O2.2OLl relegating the respondent No.4 to avail the alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer. Challenging the said order, the respondent No'4 filed Writ Appeal No.156 of 2Ol2 and the same was aiso dismissed vide judgment dated 27.04.2022 conlirming the orders passed in W.P.No. 136 of 2O 1 1. Admittedly, the counter claim filed by the petitioner and the restoration petition filed by the respondent No'4 in 4 o.S.No.438 of 2010 are pending on the file of I Addirional Senior civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District.

6. In view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition relegating the petitioner to file an appropriate application in O.S.No.43B of 20lO on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, seeking injunction restraining the alienation/ transfer of the counter claim property in favour of third parties. In the event ol filing such application, the trial Courr shall dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. As a seqrrel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. //TRUE COPYII SD/.P. PADMANABHA REDDY .\DEPUTY REGISTRAR ,\ \ F. I \ \FECTION OFFTCER tJ - ^1 To, '1 . The I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District' 2.ThePrincipalsecretary,RevenueDepartment,StateofTelangana' Telangana.

3. The Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana. 4. The Tahshildar, Shamshabad Mandal' Ranga Reddy District 5. One CC to SRI SURESH SHIV SAGAR, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

7. Two CD CoPies MPW BS HIGH COURT DATED:1710212025 ,<')=-=-:- ffi,"" " 'o'.li) I 2 3 APR 2025 () d\ i\ i t OgSPATT:H gO ;/ t ORDER WP.No.30737 of 2022 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I 1O "@ &"