The High Court · 2025

2. The Districi Cirllector, Nagarkurnool District, Nagarkurnool, Telanganq llale 3. Tn" R"u.nue Divisional 6fficer, Division Nagarkurnool, Nagarkurnool District, 4 The T;hsildar, Thimmajipet Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, Telangana State' Mallaiah, Aged about.67 years, Occ Agriculture, 5. Sri-Buramoni [Vlallesh, o Srisitfraiolu Vadli Ramesh, S/o. Sithardu Vadla Laxmaiah, Aged about.48 - yeiis, Oc6.Farmar, R/o.H.No.2-92, Marepally Village, Thimmajipet Mandal' Nagarkurnool District. z. podnimoni Srihari, S/o.Pochamoni Mallesh, Aged about l9 years. Occ Former, R/o.H.No. 1-96, C hinthakuntapally Village, Keshampet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, T.S ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ or direction more particularly in the nature of wRlT oF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 illegally executed sale deed as per petitioner sale deed vide Doc.No.475712016 and patta pass books infavour of the Respondent No.7 instead of petitioners name without following due process of law, as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and violation of principles of natural justice and also in violation of Article 14. 21 and Article 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently to DIRECT the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 make enquiry into the matter as per sale deed and delete the name of Respondent No.7 after dr-r enquiry and confirm petitioner title and possession as per sale deed and issu r the New patta pass book infavour of the petitioner, land admeasuring Ac.0-35 guntas in Sy.Nos.'15lU, Ac.0-35 guntas, in Sy.No.'15lUU, and Sy.Nr .1slEE, Ac.0-25 total Ac.2-15 guntas, situated al Marepally Village, T I immajipeta Mandal, Nagarkurnool District by virtue of registered sale deed /lde Doc.No.4757 of 2016, daied.23.09.20'16 pending drsposal of the above writ oetition lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in th€ :ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cc r rt may be pleased to DIRECT the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 make enquiry into 'l e matter as per sale deed and delete the name of Respondent No.7 after du: enquiry and confirm petitioner title and possession as per sale deed and issue the New patta pass book infavour of the petitioner, land admeasuring Ac.O-35 guntas in Sy.Nos 15/U, Ac.O-35 guntas, in Sy No.15/UU, and Sy No 15/EE, Ac.O-25 total Ac.2-15 guntas, situated at marepally Village, T I mmalipeta Mandal, Nagarkurnool District by virtue of registered sale deed ide Doc.No.4757 of 20'|.6, daled.23.09 2016 pending disposal of the above wril retition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. ROYYALA THIRUPATHAIA { Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 'lto4: AGP FOR REVENTJ : Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI G. VENKATESHAT/I Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI N. RAVI Counsel for the Respondent No.7: -- The Court made the following: ORDER .i 4 .i. n 't a I I I c' n' 'I + 6 # o {r THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICT E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PEf,ITION No.29O63 of 2O2L ORDER: This writ petition is filed with the following prayer "to issue uit or direction more partianlarlu in the nature of Wit of Mandamus declainq the action of the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 illegallu executed saLe deed as per petitioner sale deed uide Doc.No.4757/ 2016 ctnd patta pass books in fauour of the Respondent No 7 instead of petitioners name uithout follou.'inq due process of law as hiqhlu illeqal arbitraru uniust unconstitutionctl and uiolation of pinciples of natural justice and also in uiolation of Articles 14, 21 and Article 30O-A of the Constitution of lrtdia and consequentlg to direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 make enquiry into the matter as per sale deed and delete the name of Respondent No 7 after due enquiru and confirm petitioner title and possession as per sale deed and issue the Neu patta pass book in fauour of the petitioner land admeasuinq Ac.O-35 guntos in Surueu Nos.15/ U, Ac.O-35 quntas in Surueu No.LS/UU and Sun.rcu No.LS/EE Ac.O-25, total Ac 215 quntas situated at Marepallu Villaqe Thimmajipeta Mandal, Naqarkurnool Distict by uirtue of registered sole deed uide Doc.No.4757 of 2O16, dated 23 09 2016 pending disposal of the aboue utit petition"

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the un-oflicia-l respondents and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.l to 4.

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has initiated civil proceedings rnde O.S.No.230 of 2OI7 on the frle of learned Junior Civil Judge, Nagarkurnool. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the --i / -/ -\..3 \. -l \ 2 bonafide purchaser and is in possession of property located in Survey No.15/U admeasuring Ac.O-35 guntas, St rvey No.15/UU admeasuring Ac.0-35 guntas and Survey No.15,, EE admeasuring Ac.0-25 guntas situated at Marepally Village, Tirc majipeta Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, by virtue of a registered r ale deed dearing document No.4757 of 2016, dated 23.09.2016, arL, accordingly had approached the ofhcial respondent - Revenue Di.r sional Oflicer for mutation proceedings. However, uide, the impugnr'r proceedings, the respondent No.3, through letter No.Ml26la/2019, t ated 13.I1.2019, and addressed a communication to respondent No.4, directing deletion of the names of legal heirs of Smt.Shoba Rani, W/o. S hankaraiall, from the records of Survey No.15. It was stated therei r- that the subject land had already been acquired under Kalvakurt ry Lift Irrigation Scheme (for short "KLIS"), and that compensation I ad been received by Smt. Shoba Rani from her father-in-law, late lhirupathaih, on 0I.06.2007 under proper acknowledgement. It is lrrther submitted that the very question arises as to whether the ;aid letter dated

13.1i.2019, purportedly based on the acts of Smt. -ql oba Rani, can be sustained in the eye of law, in as much as there is nt _hing to record to establish that Smt. Shoba Rani was ever vested witl lawful authority to receive compensation in respect of the land which -rad already been gtfted by late Thirupathaiah in favor of his grarddr r rghters. Though smt' Shoba Rani was the daughter-in-law and mot rer of the minor children, she did not possession legal capacit5r to alienate or to receive compensation with respect to subject property. The petitioner, after verifying the legal title of the original owners, purchased the subject property through a registered sale deed and thereafter filed necessary applications before the revenue authorities seeking mutation of his name in the revenue records. However, the oflicial respondents, without considering the petitioner's request or affording him al opportunity of hearing, proceeded to record the land as acquired under the Kalvakurthy Lift Irrigation Scheme, on the basis of the alleged receipt of compensation of Smt. Shoba Rani. Such action is arbitrary, illegal and contra_ry to law. Accordingly, the petitioner prays this Court to allow the writ petition in the interest ofjustice.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit the name of KLIS has been entered in the revenue records upon thorough verification ald upon enquiry, it was found that the land had been gifted by one Thirupathaiah in favor of his granddaughters. It is further submitted that the said land was acquired by the Government in the year 2OO6 itself, and compensation was duly paid as required under law for acquiring the subject property. The petitioner, however, claims title under a sale deed bearing document No.4757 of 2016, registered before the Office of the Sub- Registrar, Achampet Mandal. It is contended that the land was acquired uide proceedings No.A3/415/2OO5, dated 13.12.2006, issued 4 !- \. \l I by the Special Collector (Land Acquisition), lheema Project, Mahabubnagar, wherein compensation of Rs.2,65,l )O/- was paid to the original landiord, Thirupathaiah. Thereafter, t 1e narne of KLIS was entered in the revenue records. Subsequently in a partition, an extent of Ac.2-25 guntas fell to the share of Smt.Sh<r ra Rarri and Ac. 1- 32 guntas to the share of Thirupathaiah. Later, Thi upathaiah repaid an amount of Rs. 1,57,000/-, which he receir t d towards land compensation in respect of Ac.2-25 guntas in iurvey No.15 of Marepally Village, Thimmajipeta Mandal, tc Shoba Rani. Consequently, Shoba Rani issued a statement decl I -ing that she had no lald in Survey No.15 of Marepally Village arrd Ir ised no objection for deletion of her name. Accordingly, the petiti<r rers' nalnes were deleted from the records. It is further submitted th rt the petitioner's purchase of Ac.2-15 guntas from Smt. Shaoba Rani, mother of minors by name Vikas, Vipula and Vijaya, under rel;r stered document No.4757 of 2076, dated 23.09.2016, has no legal I asis, as the lald had already been acquired by the Government artd -he name of KLIS has been entered in the revenue records. Therefore , the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Learned counsel for un-ofhcial respondent Nc,r .5 and 6 adopted the same contention, asserting that they had purchz sed the land from the original landlord, Thirupathaiah ald that withor; - issuing notice to them, their narnes were not entered in the rever: t e* They lecords \ t\ \ 5 contend that pattadar passbooks have already been issued in their favor and hence prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, un-oflicial respondent Nos.S and 6 and the learned Assistalt Government Pleader for Revenue, arrd upon perusal of the record, this Court noticed that Iand belonged to three persons namely Vikas, Vipula and Vijaya, represented by their mother Smt. Shoba Rani, which had already been acquired by paying compensation, and a no-objection letter issued. Accordingly, the entire extent of Ac.7-35 guntas tn Survey No.15 of Marepally Village, Thimmajipet Mandal, was acquired, )\ L and the name of KLIS has been entered in the revenue records. The question that arises is whether the consent letter issued by the land owners can be treated as valid acquisition in terms of the Land Acquisition Act, without following the procedure prescribed thereunder The issue is required to be examined by the respondents 1n consultation with the Land Acquisition authorities. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to file an application before the revenue aut-horities, who, in turn, shall issue notice to a,ll concerned parties, including the official respondents, and pass appropriate orders strictly accordance with law. 7 . In so far as the rival claims of the petitioner and un-official respondents over the subject property are concerned,. this Court refrains from making any observations. The parri rs are at liberty to work out their remedies before the competent civ r )ourt, prorrided the land is released from acquisition by the Ofhcial resl; rndents. 8' For the aforesaid reasons, the claim of the pr titioner as welr as un-ofhcial respondents does not hold any sustainir rility in the eye of 9 . Accordingly, with the above observations, t: : ,,r,,rit petition disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applicatio:r ;, if any pending, shall stald closed / I 6 To, //TRUE COPY// SD'- t,I. JAWA /.Ai \IANT HAR REDDY REGISTRAR T,SECTION OFFICER .t {r 6 {tt Telangana State

1. The Principal Secretary Revenue De_partment Secret.t at. Hyderabad.T.S. 2 The Districi coilector r.ia^garkurnoor ti;il;i. r.id;,-],urr r or, rerangana state 3 The Revenue Divisionar dnicJr, ovisio"n'iiigril';;oor {agarkurnoor District, 4. The Tahsildar Thimmaiipel M.ql_dal, Nagarkurnool Dist- )t. Telangana State 5 one cc to sRt. RoyyAG iHiR[FAi#iiXFi'iiJo".t : [opUC] 6 Two ccs to Gp FoR REVENUE ,High c;ii'ioiirre st re of reransana ar I 9n" CC to SRt N naVt , Advocate IOPUCI B. One CC to SRt c VENKATESHATTTTI nOr*'rt" [OpUC] 9. Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUT) BM BS ) ,;r,., 4fiEr$4 =-T 6 ; HtcH couRT DATED:0810912025 srari-l ,t, 1 B ;ECM '.\,A] (' t, [) ,A ORDER WP.No.29063 of 2021 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WITHOUT COSTS + (r + G c + + {' \?-- t-