High Court · 2025

The Tahsildar, Kosgi Mandal, Narayanpet District, Telangana. B. Srinivasulu, S/e. and Age. Not known to the F)etitioner, Occ.Tahsildar, Kosgi Mandal, Narayanpet District, Telangana. P. Chennappa, S/o. Chinna Ellappa, Aged. years, Occupation. Agriculture, R/o Sarjakhanpet Village, Kosgi Mandal, Narayanap€rt District, P. lshwappa, S/o. , Ashappa, Occupation. Agriculture, Ql/o Sarjakhanpet Village, Kosgi MandBl, Narayanapet District. P. Ramachander, S/o. Pedda Ellappa, Occup,ation. Agriculture, Rl/o Sarjakhanpet Village, Kosgi Mandal, Narayanapet Dist'ict

10. P. Suryam, S/o, Chendrappa, Occupation Village, Kosgi lvlandal, Narayanapet District.

11.P. Nlogulappa, S/o. Rayappa, Occupation Village, Kosgi Mandal, Narayanapet District. AgricLrlture, R/o Sarjakhanpet AgricLrlture, RYo Sarjakhanpet .,.RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of ndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, tre High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, nlore particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the higrhanded action of the Respondents No.2 to 6 more particularly the Responder t No.4 and 5, in issuing (i) impugned proceedings / orders vide lr'N7112022, dat:d. 27.06.2025, (ii) 38-E certificates U/s 38 - E of the Telangana Tenants and agr cJltural lands act, 1950, (iii) Entries in revenue rRecords / Bhu Bharathi and (iv) Patta Passbooks in favour of the respondents No.7 to 11, without following due p'ocess of law as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, viohtive of the Principles of Natuta Justice, violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the Petitioners anc violative of Article 14, 19(t )(9) and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and also contrary to the provisions I I ': i contemplated under the Telangana Rights in Land and pattadar passbooks Act 2025 and consequenily set-aside (i) impugned proceedings / orders vide Lr'N7112022, cdE,l.Zt..g6.2ci25,.(ii) 38-E certificares u/s 38 -E of the Terangana Tenants and agricdriarar ,rands,'act, 1950, (iii) Entries in revenue Records / Bhu Bharathi and (iv) Patta Passbooks in favour of the respondents No.7 to 11. lA NO: 1 OF 20?5, t- ' :'"1'. , . r.i . ? lD., Petition &ader.€ection I{&r';opc 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 No.4 and 5, to not entertain any transactions or alterations affecting the nd rre ard ..status of land due to transactions made by Respondents No.7 to 1'1 p€nCin€.dasposal of main Writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for thefctitioner : SRI S.LAKSHMI KANTH Counsel for the.ftespondents No.1to5: SRt L.RAVINDER, AGp FOR REVENUE Counsel for thdr&spoaderts $to.6toi l : SRI p.SH|VA REDDy The Court madE the lotrowing: ORDER ,} : i:{..'- (7 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENIJGOPAL II/RIT PETITION No.28557 of 2O25 / ORDER: <t, This Writ Petition. under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the follori r ng relief ''.. . to rssr.e att appropnctle Wnt Order tt ' Di'e'ctiort more partictlarlg orrc in tlre nature of Wnt of ,\ larLdantus cleclanng the highhanded actiort of the Re'sportdents Nos.2 to 6 more particularty tle Respondent Nos.4 and 5 impugned proceedings/ ortters uide in issuirzg (, Lr.A/71i2022. dated 27 06.2025' (ii) 38-E certiftcates U/ s.38-E of the Telangat tcL Tettants and ogricultural lands Act, 1950 (iii) Enties in reuenue Records/ Bhu Bharathi a,tLl (iu) Patta Prtssbooks in fauour of the respondetlts Nos'7 to 1 1 without fotlowing due process of lau c's illegaL arbitrary unjust uiolatiue of the Pinciples t.i Nrttural Justice ttiolatiue of Fundarnental Rtghts guarat'teed to the Petitioners and uiolatiue of Articles 1a, 19(1)(tl) cotd 3OOA of the Constitution of India and also cotttr.u lJ ta the prouisiorrs contemplated under the Telanganr Rights in Lancl arul Pattadar Pns.sbook-s Act, :025 and consequerily set aside (r) (i, intptLgrred proceedtngs / orders uide Lr.rt1 71/ -2022 clated 27.06.2O25 38-tr certificates U/ s.38-E of the 'l'elcouTana Tertatl's and agiculturul Lartds Act, 195() (iii) Etltnes it rettenue Records/ Bhtt BhctruLll i cutd I Page 2 of8 (i") Patta Passbooks in fauour of the respondents Nos.7 to 11.

2. Heard Sri S.Lakshmi Kanth, learned counsel appearing 'ned assistani Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and P.Shiva Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.6 to 11 and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners herein are the absorute owners and possessors of lancl to an extent of Acs. 18.C6 guntas ir_t Sy.No.1 12, situated at Ejipur Village, Kosgi Mandal, Narayanapet District, having pattabooks and also the names of the petrtioners are reflected in the revenue records, to an extent of their respective lands in S-y.No.112, which are subdivided accordingly and the same is also reflected in Bhu Bharati Portai.

4. One Rukma Reddy was the original owner, pattadar of the subject property. Later on, he sold it to one Varla Narsimulu, by executing an absolute registered sale deed in the year 1964 and. subsequently, his name was recorded in :- Page 3 of8 the revenue records. Thereafter, pursuant to oral partition between V.Narsimulu and his brother, the subjecrt land has been partitioned rnto two parts V.Narsimulu to an extent of Acs.9.04 guntas in Sy.No.l12 IAAIAA and V.Naral'ana to an extent of Acs.9.02 guntas in Sy.No. I12 I Al 1, the r:spondent- authorities also issued pattedar passbooks. While the matter stood, respondent No.4 under the guise of :ompliance of order dated 03.12.202\ passed in W.P.No.32O3t of 2O2l has issued orders in proceedings uide Lr.Al7 | 12022, dated 27.06.2025, wherein respondent No.4 has conferred ownership rights in the script of subject land to :.r extent of Acs.16.02 guntas in Sy.No.1 12 in favour of resporLcent Nos.7 to i 1 by issuing 38-E certificates under Section 3i3-E of the Telangana Tenants and Agricttlturarl Lands Act, 1!)5;0.

5. Pursuant to the order dated 03.12.2021 passed 1n W.P.No.32035 ol 2021, after more than t1: ree years, respondent No.5 suddenly issued a communication dated IO.O2.2025 to respondent No.4, u,herein the nanres of the petitioners were reflected as the pattadars and p()ssessors of their respective extents in the subject 1and. But the reason best known to respondent No.4, a notice uide No.AlT l 12022, dated 22.O2.2025 was sent to petitioner No.1 instead of a1l the interested parties. Upon receiving the same, petitioneL No. I enquired with the other petitioners and has acknowledged that all concerned parties were not put on notice as per the directions of this Court. Thereafter, all the petitioners together have submitted a reply dated 04.03.2025 placing their objections before respondent No.5. Despite their being prima facie evidential material submitted to respondent No.S, an order dated 27.06.2025 uide Proc.Lr.No.A l7l12022 was passed by respondent No.5 without considering the reply submitted by the petitioners and has issued certificates under Section 38-E of the Telangana Tenants and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 ('for short, the Act, i950'). Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred an Appeal under Section 90 of the Act, 1950 before respondent No.3 seeking to set aside the order dated

27.06.2025.

6. Petitioner No. 1 was served with an endorsement ulde No.RK/51/2O2 1, dated 28.O4.2021, wherein, respondent ,"/, l'age 5 o1 8 No.4 has clearly stated that there are no Frl' registers on Sy.No.1 12lAl I which is also part and parcel ,r{ the subject land ancl hen ce no such information can Lre providedl Petitioner No.1 has also made an appll(ration before respondent No.5 to furnish the information of the protected tenants in the subject property, respondent Nc.lj has issued an endorsement uide No.RK/407/2025, dateC 07.O8.2025 stating that the entire protect tenants register itself is unavailable and hence the same cannot be p rovided. It is evident that the respondents are high landedly and arbitrarily, acting hand in glove n'ith the trnofficial respondents. 7 . While the matter stood, unofficial respor: dent Nos.7 to 11 with the active cooperation of respondent N,ls;.4 and 5 are attempting to alienate the subject land unde r the guise of 38-E ownership granted by respondent No.z-, in order to effect rights and possession of the petitioners herein permanentlv and irreparably. Under the above circumstances petitioner No. 13 was compelle,1 to zrpproach respondent No.5 with a representation date,l 74.08.2025, Page 6 of ll requesting respondent No.5 not to entertain any mutations, registrations or transactions effecting the entries of the revenue records while Appeal is pending before respondent No.3, as persistent efforts are being made by the unofficial respondents to alienate the subject property rn greedy'. But to the utter surprise and dismay respondent No.5 neither replied nor responded, pay,ii-:g any heed to the representation dated 14.A8.2O25 made beiore him. Under rhese circumstances, the peti..ioners are left with no alternative remedy except approaching this Court by filing r.he present writ petition. B. Learned counsel appearing fcr respondent Nos.6 to 11 would submit that rhe official respondents upon thorough verification has passed 38-E certificate in favour of the unofficial respondents. Aggrieved b1' the said 38-E proceedings, the petitioners liled preferred an Appeal under Secl-ion 90 of the Act, l950 before respondent No.3, whicl-r is pending for acij udicati or-r .

9. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that the Appeal filed by the petitioner 1S l'itge 7 ol ll pending for adjudication before respondenr No.3. The petitloners \,vithout \\,aiting for the outcome of the said Appeal have rushed to this Court at a premature stage by o filing the,present writ petition. Hence, seeks to <lismiss the

10. In the lighr- of the aforesaid facts and circunrstarces of the case and upon perusing the material avail:rlt e on record, this rrrit petition is disposed of, directing respon l,,,nt No.3 to adjudicate the Appeal filed bv the peritioners. srrictl,r, in accordance r.r'rth las, b-r, putting the petitioners. resptndent Nos.6 to 11 and all affected parties on notice aeC alfording them an opportunitv of hearing. lf, respondenr |,lo.3 is not inclined to accept the request made by the pe -i.,ronr:rs, he shal1 assign specific reasons, pass a reasoned order, communicate a copy of the said order to the petitioners and complete the sitid exercise as expeditiously iLsr possible. Parties to this urit petition shall maintain sla/r,s quct order obtained as on clate in respect of the subject propertf in all respects till finalising the Appeal filed by thc Jretirroners. There shall be no order as to costs. \ l'dgc 8 of E As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, sha1l stand dismissed To, /iTRUE COPY// d/-A,v.s. P PUTY REGI RA{AD STRAR ECTION OFFICER 1 , The Principal Secretary, State of Telangana, Departmen Secretariat, Hyderabad. t of Revenue

2. The District Collector, Narayanapet District Telangana. 3. The Additional Collector, Narayanapet District Telangana. 4. The Revere Divisional Officer, Narayanapet District, Telangana' 5. The Tahsildar, Kosgi Mandal, Narayanpet District, Telangana 6. One CC to SRI S.LAKSHMI KANTH' Advocate. [OPUC] 7. Two CCs.to GP-FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana

8. One CC to SRI P.SHIVA REDDY, Advocate. [OPUC] 9, Two CD Copies. PMK BSK W I i HIGH COURT DATED:2711012025

4.. ORDER WP.No.28557 of 2025 Bo 1H t. lj r4 r,t- 21il0v 206 * D -A t p.1I ueo. C DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS v\