LE SRI JUSTICE C v. BHASKAR RT)DD''' WRIT PETITION No

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia piaying that in the clrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be ..,..RESPONDENTS n pleased to issr.,: i r Writ Order or Direction more in the natur( ) of Writ Of Mandamus declr,rrir3 the action of the Respondent No. 2 to,1 rn including the names of the f:if .h and Sixth Respondents rn respect of 34A1511. 340'512, 3401515, 340/5/6 total adnrez suring 5 acres and 3401611, 3401612, 3401e 13. i40l 614, total admeasuring ,l t:cr<: 32 Guntas, situated in Narsingi Village, 3anr ipet Mandal, Rangareddy Dist-ict ir the Dharani portal, contrary to the orders dateC 27th March 2014 in WP nr gil '() ot 2O14 and 24th January 2019 in WP ro 4'590 of 2018 and. also the o'dr: s of the Special Tribunal, Rangareddy t)rstri.rt dated 8th i. rrrcceeding no. Cl268l 2018, as being arbitrary arrd illegal and February 201€ accordingly set aside the same and.direct the Respondent No. 2 to 4 restore the names of the \tV. t F€titioners in respect of Survey Number 340'5 ar,d 340/6 total admeasuring 9 zrr;res 1 7 guntas in Narsingi Villager, C andi ret [,4andal, Rangareddy Dislrict |.A.NO:1 OF 2023 Petition UndE-Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circunrstarces stated in the affidavit fi erl r r r;upport of the petition, the High Court m ay b,: pleased to restrain the sth and fith respondents or their successors in interesI or assignees, legal representatives from alienating, encumbering, transf erring, c )nveying the subject property n 1,101511 , 3401512, 3401515, 340/5/6 total adn,easLrring 5 acres and 3401611, :tLoleil2, 3401613, 3401 614, total admeasurinr; 4 rrcrer 32 Guntas, situated in Nars rg i '/illage, Gandipet lrilandal, Rangareddy Di,rtrict to any third parties in any rn?1rror whatsoever pending disposal of the writ pt:titio L |.A.NO:2 OF 202:i, Petition urCerr 'Section 151 CPC praying that in the circunstanles stated in the affidavit filec in :;upport of the petition, the High Cou't miry b:) pleased to restrain the 5ti :rnC 3th respondents from interfering with the peareful position and enjoyment o'th() writ petitioners of the subject property in sr,rvey no.34Ol5l1, 3401512, 34Olt;/5 :40/5/6 total admeasuring 5 acres and :\4Olt'11, 34016/2, 34016/3, 34Ol 614, lctal admeasuring 4 acres 32 Guntas. sitLratec in Narsingi Village, Gandipel lrl;andal, Rangareddy District belonginq to the petitioners, pending disposal of ,he writ petition. I.A.NO:3 OF 2023 Petition under Section 15'r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in suppo( of the petition, the High Cou( may be pleased to suspend the entries in the Dharani portal in respect of 340t511, 340t5t2, 340t5t5, 340/5/6 total admeasuring 5 acres and 34ot611, 3401612, 34ot613, 34ot 614, totat admeasuring 4 acres 32 Guntas, situaled in Narsingi Village, Gandipet Mandal, Rangareddy District standing in the name of the 5th and the 6th respondent pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI E.MADAN MOHAN RAO, SENIOR COUNSEL REPRESENTATIVE FOR SRI SRIKANTH HARIHARAN., ADVOCATE. Counsel for the Respondent Nos.l to 4 : AGp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI G.V.L.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.6 :- The Court made the following ORDER - THE HCIN']]LE SRI JUSTICE C. V. BHASKAR RT)DD''' WRIT PETITION No.3OO39 of2o23 ORDER: This rV, ir l',:tition, under Article 226 of thre Const tutiln of India, is I rlc d r x:eking the following relief: "....to issut: t lVit, Order or Direction more in the nature of Wit Of Mand.anru. Ll ,r:laing the action of the respondent Nos'2 '(t 1 itt includnT I r.r r.rnes oJ the Fifth qnd Sixlh Respo dents in re;1tecl of 34O/5/ 1, 34( / 5/2, 340/5/5, 34O/5/6 total admeasu4ttg ) tt.,es and 340/rjr1 310/6/2, 340/6/3, 340/6/4 total adtneos tnng 4 acres 32 it-Lt'1ns situated in Narsingi Village, Oandipet l latla , Rangare c)ag .)'stict in the Dharani portal contrary t.' the ordt'rs d-ated 27' Lhtrctr 2014 in WP No.9876 of 2O14 and 24tt' -rtnur ry 2019 in l.'P tto.4759O oJ 2018 and also the orders ol the Spe(ial Tibuna F T'lareddA Distict dated 8'h February 2O18 ir pro:ee'ding no C/268 2)19 as betng arbitrary and illegal and occordi q[!i ;et aside tlLe sc't 1,? ond direct the respondent Nos.2 to 4 reslore' the names t,f r rc. \it Petitioners in respect of Surueg Numbel 34(t/ 5 o1d 34O/6 otrtl r tlnLeasuing 9 acres 77 guntas in Narsu4li ViLla p, Gandipt't lkv 4al, Rangareddg Distict..--"

2. Cons lcl ::r,: I the submissions of the learned (lourisel for the respective pa r tie s and perused the record

3. It is th,: (:t s;e of the petitioners that they are lhe ()\vn( rs and possessors ol li nd admeasuring Acs.4.35 guntas anC A:s.4.22 guntas in Si1,.Nc s.340/5 and 34O/5 situated at Narsi-rgi /illage, Gandipet I\4z.n,l al, Rangareddy District, having pur< has 3d the same througl . :-,liistered sale deed bearing document No.( 297 of 1983, date,l l.:. [r8.1983 and their names were a]so rnutrrted in 2 1 the revenue records by virtue of mutation proceedings No.B/527 197, dated 15.05.2006. It is further case of the petitioners that respondent No.3-special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Ofhcer, Rajendranagar Division ('SGDC & RDO, Rajendranagar Division) without issuing any notice, issued proceedings uid.e No.C/26O/2O14, dated 07.O3.2O14 by setting aside the mutation ord.er uide No.Bl527 /97, dated 15.05.2006 issued in their favour and remitted the matter to respondent No.4-Tahsildar, Gandipet Mandal, to pass orders afresh as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short "ROR Act, 7971"1; and questioning the said proceedings, the petilioners have hled W.P.No.9876 of 2074 on the lile ol this Court, wherein this Court uide order dated 27.03.2014 granted interim order as follows: "uthqteuer the entries in the reuenue record., existing as on tod.aA, to contiiue for a peiod. of three(3) u-teek-s" It is the case of the petitioners that as on the date of passing said orders by this Court, the names of the petitioners are continuing in the revenue records. It is stated that questioning the very same proceedings dated 07.O3.2014, third parties have hled another W.P.No.9522/ 2014 on the hle of this Court and the same is pending for adjudication. The grievance of the petitioners is that 3 pending adjrclir;ztion of W.P.Nos.9522l2074 and 9876,' 2Ol 4 and contrary to '.ht stoh;.s quo orders granted b1- tt.is lourt, respondent N ),1 ras proceecled to conduct enquiry atd lrassed proceedings I'o.lt 1268/2017, dated 27.O5.2O17 for carn,irtg out changes in tht' rr r, enue records in favour of respondent Nos 5 and 6 in respect o't re subject lands. Therefore, the petr[ioners ;eek a direction to reslondents to restore the entries in the revenue records in tems c[ the sfafus qzo orders passed b], his Court and cancel tht' er tries made in favour of respondent No:;.5 end 6.

4. Sri E,. ll4aclan Mohan' Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing fcr th: oetitioners, sutrmitted that the subjec ma tter of this writ F,e1.itj< ri is squarely covered by the orrler dated

03.L2.2024 prrsr;,:,l by this Court in W.P.No.29870 ol 2023 It is further submitte: that the Additional Collector, Rar-. ga ?eddy District, pa:is,:'cl FIOR proceedings in No.D1/ 1383/2014, dated

14.O8.2O2O lr! setting aside the impugnei crder s in Proc.No.C/26(.: l)-a74 dated O7.O3.2O14 passed by r,:spcndent No.3 and irL gir:.r. of setting aside the said order, the k arned Single Judg,: rid z order dated 06.12.2024 closed \V.P. Nos 9522, 9876 of 2Ol4 anl 47590 of 2018, as the cause in the sai I writ I petition doe:; nr: t survive for further adjudication; anc th, said order was assrail,r,l before the Division Bench of this Co rrt in 4 t I \ W.A.Nos.181 ard 182 of 2O2S wherein this Court uid.e order, dated 11.O2.2025 disposed of the same permitting the appellant to challenge the order, dated 14.0g.2O2O in appropriate fresh proceedings, if he is aggrieved with the said order.

5. Following the order, dated 1 l.O2.2O2S in W.A.Nos. lg1 and 7.82 of 2025, this Writ Petition is closed. It is made clear that this order does not come in the way of implementation of the order dated 03.72.2O24 passed by this Court in W.p.No.2987O of 2023; and in view of setting aside the order, dated OZ .O3.2O74, |ne consequential proceedings, dated 27.O5.2017 issued by respondent No.4 is set aside. It is needless to observe that after deciding the /is between the inter se parties, the petitioners are at liberty to make appropriate application for mutation of their names in the revenue records and for consequential issuance of pattadar passbooks in their favour. There shall be no order as to costs. 6 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/ A. SRINIVAS REDDY S ISTANT REGISTRAR I Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for Hyderabad. [OUT]

2. One CC to SRI SRTKANTH HARTHARAN, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRt G.V.L.MURTHY, Advocare (OPUC) 4. Two CD Copies SECTION OFFICER State of Telangana at To SA ?144 ,.. r:-.ji, -'..1. .. ,' rt'.tli-.r-i..i- -:.1- .. ",t.1 -- ---- ,./ cg l llt St4 ,€ o o )( 2 I lH 2025 ', ". HIGH COI.JRT DATED:1'llc:r12025 ORDER WP.No.300ii9 of 2023 CLOSING'THE W.P WITHOI,,T ,(;OSTS. ,e\S\r-r" L