The High Court · 2025

LTRAppealNo.A4lLIRl326t2oo2'dated04.lO.20l2inconfirmingorderofthe 3rdrespondentin.CaseNo-TWA2/20B4t84dated29061996isillegal'arbitrary' contrary to the evidence on record, provisions of Telangana Land Transfer Regulation '1959, violatron of the principles of natural justice and as well as the fundamentalrightsguaranteedundertheConstitutionoflndiasetasidethesame and consequently direct the respondents to grant E- Pattadar Pass Books in favour of the petitioners for the above said survey numbers and extent I t a I i F F T I , r I t I I I IANO:1OF2 023 Petition under section 15i 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 respondents rot to interfere / dispossess the petitioner land in sy No. 30 to an extent of Ac. 5.08 guntas situated at Rotmamda Vi age, Naradigonda lVlandal, Adilabad Districrt by suspending the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in LTR Appeal No. A4l LTR t326r20o2, dated 04.10.2012 in confirming order of the 3rd respondent in case No TWA2/20g4184 dared 29.06.1996 forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition IANO:1OF2 024 Between: 1 ^ vvetlare uepartment. Secretariat Buildinqs, Hvderabad. 2 Ihe Project officer rntegrated rribar Deierophent Auihority ( rrDA,l Utnoor, 3 Ilg 9pg"frl Deput'7 Collector, Tribal Welfare, Utnoor Village and [\/andal, Telan3ana, Rep by its principat Secretary Sociat and Tribat Adilabad District. ll^q._Sjgtg "f Adilabad District AND I .....PETtTtONERS/RESpONDENTS 1 to3 Nange Srinivas, S/,r Late Rajeshwar, {ged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Wadoor Viilage. Naradig6ndaMana5t, AOifauaJbi.tri"t ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 2 Sri Ray Chand S/o Gannu,.Aged abgu! 57 years, Occ. agriculture R/o. Kistapur Village, Naradigonda "Mandal, Adilabad Oi.iri"t. (Respondent No.2 is not necessary party to this petitioner) ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 preased to vacate the interim order dt 29 122023 in l.A No.1/2023 in Wp No 33O22t2O23, and may dismiss the Wp Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAMESH CHILLA counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to3: Gp FoR socrAl WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: __ The Court made the iollowing: ORDER a , t I ----v 1 wp_33022_2023 NBK, I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTIC E NAGES H BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETTTION No.33022 of 2023 ORDER: The case ofthe petitioner, briefly stated as per the writ affidavit, is that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the land to an extent o[ Ac.5-08 guntas in Survey No.30 of Rolmamda Village, Naradigonda Mandal, Adilabad District, by inheritance from his ancestors; and the 2nd respondent- Additional Agent to Government, vide order dated 04. 10.2012 in LTR Appeal No.A4ILTR/32612002 directed restoration of the subject land to Government custody, by confirming the order dated2g'06'1996 passed by the 3'd respondent-Special Deputy Collector (TW) in TW A212084184'

1.1 It is the grievance of the petitioner that the 2''d respondent (and even the 3.d respondent) has not issued any notice, or afforded an opportunity of hearing before passing the impugned orders. It is his further grievance that even as per the evidence before the 2nd respondent-appellate authority, the 4,h respondent (Mr. Rai Chand) did not file an appeal and that the 4th respondent stated that he was a former servant and the petitioner is the pattadar of the subject land and the 4th respondi:nt is shown as cultivator.

1.2 It is the contention of the petitioner that the LTR proceedings were initiated based on a Staff Survey and there was no illegal transfer of land between non-tribals even as per the evidence ofrespondent No'4'

2. Heard Mr. Ramesh Chilla, leamed counsel for the petitioner; and leamed Govemment Pleader for Social Welfare' Perused the record' Leamed counsel for the petitioner, while making submissions in line 3. with the writ affidavit, essentially contends that the petitioner acquired the 2 .- wp 33022_2023 NBK,,J subject property ry inheritance lrom his ancestors and the name of petitioner's fathcr '.vas reflected in the pahanies for 1954-55, and the land is not hit by the Land Transfer Regulations; and the 3d responden t and 2nd respondent without giving any opportunity nor examining the revenue records, passed thc irnpugned orders which are unsustainabte in law. It is also contended that the impugned LTR proceedings were initiated based on a report submitted b1' the survey staff without foilowing due procedure. It is also contended that one Murarsingh, S/o Dev Singh filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent-,\dditionar Agent, whereas the 4rh respondent herein is a respondent before the 3'd respondenrspeciar Deputy collector, and the 4,h respondent has categorically deposed before the 2nd respordent-Additional Agent that he has not fired any appeal and that he was a fbrmer servant of the petitioner and th,: pctitioner is the owner as per revenue records and there is no illegal sale transaction between the parties. Learned counsel fired a Memo dated 23.07.r'.025 staring that Murarsingh has expired in 2023 as per the statement ol the villagers.

4. Leamed Govr:mment pleader for Social Welfare, in support of the impugned order, contends that in response to the Show cause notices issued by the 3'd resporrdr'nr-Special Deputy Collector (TW), the respondents attended the Court and deposed that N. Rajeshwar is the pattadar and Rai chand (the 4th respondent) purchased the subject land for Rs. 10,,000i_ and that the 3'd respondent verified the documents available in the record and come to the conclusi.n that there is transfer of land between non-tribals, and the same constitutes. violation of Land Transfer Regulation Act, 1959 (Amended Regulation I of 1970), and therefore the 3d respondent has directed for taking o,rer of the land into Govemment custody, and the 2nd respondent has rightly affirmed the orders passed by the 3.d respondent. a wp '330)2_2023 N8K, J Leamed Govemment Pleader further contends thal" the petitioner has an efficaciousremedyofrevisionbeforetheGovemment'andthepetitioner may be relegated to avail the statutory remedy of revision'

5. Having considered the respective submissions and perused the record' it is to be noted that the impugned Order dated 04'102012 reveals that the 4rh respondent (Mr. Rai chand) deposed before the 2nd respondent that he has not filed any appeal and that he is former servant of the respondent (N' Rajeswar, i.e., father of the petitioner)' N' Rajeswar is arrayed as 3'd respondent before the 2nd respondent, whereas it is the contention of the petitionerthattherewasnonoticetothefatherofthepetitioner.Further,it is the specific assertion of the petitioner that there was no notice to him before passing the impugned orders' These are questions of fact that cannot be gone into in this writ petition' The impugned order dated 04'i0'2012 would show that the subject land was taken into Govemment custody for further action. In that view of the matter, this Courl deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by granting liberly to the petitioner to avail statutory remedy of revision before the Govemment'

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, by granting tiberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of Revision before the Govemment' within a period ofeight weeks from the date ofreceipt ofa copy ofthis order' Till then, there shall be status quo with regard to the subject property No costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending ifanY, shall stand closed SD/-P. PONNA KRISHNA S STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTI ON OFFICER To, The Principal Secretary Social and Tribal Welfare Department' Secretariat ?Hl'#ilJ 3tlll?iii33?","0 rribar Deveropment Authoritv ( rrDA) Utnoor' +fl l'38Sr'Ji5':5utv collector, rribal werare' Utnoor Village and Mandal' 4fl533,3''J'A:l *o*"n cHTLLA Advocate [oPUC]

1. 2 4 I I 5 Two CCs to GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE ,High Court for the State of 6. Two CD Copies Telangana at Hycerabad [OUT] BIM r \ I j HIGH COURT DATED:2810712025 t l I i , , t I ',) ,..',1, 13 I]IT 2025 a, c t c' if ' ORDER WP.No.33022 of 2023 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS t3 tplol- I I i t a