Peddi Vijaya Bhaskar v. Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad

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 any appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents No. 2 to 4 in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 22- 07- 2024 seeking mutation and issuance of the Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed in his favour on the basis of registered Sale Deed bearing Doct. No. 951/2013, dated 01- 05- 2013, registered in the office of Sub- Registrar, Bheemdevarapally, in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.2- 00 Gts. in Sy. No. 76, situated at Valbhapur Village of Elkathurthy Mandal, Hanamkonda District, as per the order passed by the 2nd respondent vide Proceedings No. 011193812023, dated 20-04-2024, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and against the principles of natural justice, and consequently, direct the respondents to mutate the name of the petitioner in the Revenue records, in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.2-00Gts.inSy.No.T6,situatedatValbhapurVillagecfElkathurthyMandal' Pattadar Passbook and litle Deeds' in the Hanamkonda District, and issue interest of justice lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the r rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High coLrr may be pleased to direct the Respondents No. 2 to 4 to consider the represen i tion of the petitioner daled 22- 07- 2024. pending disposal of writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. THIMMARAJU RAMCHANT) fA RAO Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 1to4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent No. 5: SRI T. SURYA SATISH The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.24798 of 2o24 ORDER: This Writ Petition is frled under Article 226 of Constitution ol India seeking the following relief/s:- respect of "...to issue any appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents No.2 to 4 in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 22.O7.2024 seeking mutation and issuance of thc Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed in his favour on the basis of registered Sale Deed bearing Doct.No.951l2Ol3, dated 01.05.2013 the office of Sub Registrar, registered in Bheemdevarapaliy in admeasuring Ac.2.00 Gts in Sy.No.76, situated at Valbhapur Village of Elkathurthy Mandal, Hanamkonda District as per the order passed by the 2"d respondent uide Proceedings No.D1/ 1938/2023, dated 2O.O4.2O24 as 'arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to mutate the name of the petitioner in the Revenue records in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.2.0O Gts in Sy.No.76, situated at Valbhapur Village of Elkathurthy Mandal, Hanamkonda District and issue Pattadar Passbook and Title Deeds ..." illegal,

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Mr.Surya Satish, learned counsel for respondent No.5. Perused the record. 2

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would r ubmit that the petitioner is the pattadar and possessor of lanrl to an extent of Ac.2.00 gutnas 1n Sy.No.76, situated at Valb.r rpur Village of Elkathurthy Mandal, Hanamakonda District, h r ring purchased the same through a registered sale der:rl bearing Doc No.951/2013, dated 01.05.2013. He would ; rbmit that the petitioner made a representation dated 12.O7 .2024 to respondent authorities seeking issuance of pat.edar passbook and title deed on the basis of the registered szrl€ deed conveyed in favour of the petitioner vide sale deed Dr < No.951 /2013, dated 01.05.2013 in respect of the land admcr suring Ac.2.0O guntas in Sy.No.76 of Vallabhapur Village, ElkiL: hurthi Mandal, Hanmakonda. Vide proceedings No.D1/ 19))/2023, dated

20.O4.2024 respondent No.2 has not been :onsidered the representation submitted by petitioner. He wcr ld submit that respondent No.4 uide impugned proceedings Nr.B/ 6922/2005, dated 18.09.2008 had issued the Form 13(b and 13(c) and pahanies for the year 2O 13 and 2O I 5 depicts , Le name of the petitioner's vendor as pattadar and possessor of the subject land. 3

4. He would further submit that since the name of the petitioner has not been entered into the revenue records, he made an application in Dharani Portal vide transaction ID No.05104400002324, dated 17.03.2O23 seeking mutation of his name. Iearned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the registered sale deed Doc No.951/2013, dated 0I.05.2013 duly registered in the office of Sub-Registrar, Bheemadevarapally . He would further submit that on the application made by the petitioner, the District Collector- respondent No.2 had rejected the same uide irnpugned proceedings No.D1/193812023, dated

20.04.2024 upon denova enquiry conducted by respondent No.4 - Tahsildar. Learned counsel submits that Fotms 13(b) and 13(c) having been issued in favour of the vendors, conclusively establish their entitlement. Unless those proceedings are set aside, any subsequent entries or rights granted in the revenue records in favour of the other respondents would be legally unsustainable and confer no rights in law. Hence, he would submit that impugned proceedings issued by respondent No.2 - District Collector are perverse and not in accordance with law and seeks to allow this writ petition. 4 ;.1 .'r;';':.i

5. Opposing the Same, learned counsel frl.- the unofficial respondent No.5 wouid submit that the petitiont I claim has not been considered where the denova enquiry has I een conducted by the Tahsildar- respondent No.4. Upon cor< ucting denova enquiry and on its report, the official respondent ras rightly and appropriately passed the impugned proceedings. t is also in the matter of record that the petitioner had appr,r rched the civil Court and filed a suit in O.S.No.786 of 2024 o r the fik: of IV Additional Junior Civil Judge at Hanmakonda. f,r declaration of title and to declare the entries of the Record ol' F ights in favour of the father of the defendant Nos. L and 2 as rru 1 and void and to grant consequential relief of permanent injun: .ion, where the unofficial respondent has also made a party ( efendant. He would further submit that the said proceedings r -e pending and it is cleariy established that the petitioner has ought relief in the said suit as against the official respondent r s well i.e., the District Collector. He wouid submit that d; ri proceedings cannot be conducted on the same cause of actr< r and when the matter is pending before the appropriate civil Cr urt, this Court cannot decide the factual aspects under i :ction 226 of Constitution of India and seeks to dismiss this u r t petition. 1 5

6. L,earned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue also taking the same lines submitted by learned counsel for unofficial respondent and would submit that the parties to this writ petition are admittedly contesting parties before the civil Court in O.S.No.786 of 2024. The official respondents are bound by the orders passed by the Civil Court under Section g(2) of the ROR Act. Hence, he would seek to dismiss this writ petition as the parties are already agitating their case before the civil Court.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue a,d rearned counsel for unofficial respondent and upon careful pemsal of the materials placed before this Court, it is apparent that the petitioner had filed a suit in O.S.No.786 of 2024 on the file of IV Additional Junior Civil Judge at Hanumakonda and the unofficial respondent is the party defendant in the said suit and the same is pending adjudication. Therefore, without making any observations on the merits or demerits of the case, this Court does not see any reason or merit to keep the writ petition pending, since the parties to this writ petition are parties before the civil Court for adjudication of civil rights. i I I I 6

8. Accordingly, this writ petition is liabl: to be and accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shr L stand closed. I I To, SD'. ASI; ). PONNA KRISHNA STANT REGISTRAR -*'-7 //TRUE COPY// Eecrroru oFFlcER [OPUC] -op Foi REVLNaE ,High court for the S:i te of Telangana at

1. One CC to SRl. THIMMARAJU RAMCH4NDBA RAB ' 'dvocate i. iil cc. io s. iji,;"bC 6 SRt rl sunvn sATlsH, Advocate [oPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies Hvderabad [OUT] B M n," LS LIf' HIGH COURT DATED:2011112025 ORDER WP.No.24798 of 2024 {i{i lh ( UR t o() * 1t i 2il?l v z.o\ t a'.1 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITI. OUT COSTS [{ \t )b