Rachamalla Saidulu v. 1. The State of Telangana

2. The District Collector, NalgonQa, Nalgonda District 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Miryalaguda Division, Nalgonda District. 4. The Tahsildar, Tripuram Man(al, Nalgonda District. 5. Sri Rachamalla Ramachandraiah (died), as per LRs. 6. Rachamalla Sandegp Ya(av, S/o Late Rachamalla Ramchandraiah, Aged about 40 ye4rs, Occ Business, Rlo H.no.2-3-724nn15, Maruthi Nagar, Ambarpet, Hyderabad.

7. Rachamalla Shiva, S/o Late Rachamalla Ramchandraiah, Aged about 35 ygars, Occ Agriculture, R/rc H.No.'l-54, Gundlapah4d Village, Palakeedu Mandal, Suryapet District.

8. Yallavula Nagalakshmi, Dio Late Rachamalla Ramchandraiah. Aged about 38 years, Qcc Hbusewife, R1o H.No.4-BB/1 , Keethavarigudem, Garidepalli Mandal, Suryapet District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 pteased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.4 in issuing the lmpugned Order yide Procgs. No.8118712022, dated 18.'10.2024 and directed to rectification of records in respect of the land in Sv.Nos.62, 63, 65 and 66 situated at Tripuraram Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District, and trying to make the necessary changes in Dharani Portal on the land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.6.00 gts in Sy.No 62, 63, 64 and 66 situated at Tripuraram Village and Mandal' Nalgondi District and trying to change the name of the respondent No.6 to 8, without issuing any notice, without following the due process of law, straight away trying to cancel the pattadar passbooks of the petitioner by colluding with the respondent No.6 to B is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Principles of Natural J ustice and also in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia, set aside the same and consequently direct the responflent No.4 not to change revenue records in respect of the land in 6y.Noq.6Z, 63, 65 and 66 situated at Tripuraram Village and Mandal,..Nalgonda District, and nqt to make the necessary changes in Pharani-Portal on the land of the petitioner to an er:tent of Ac.6.00 gts in Sy.No.62,63.64 and 66 situated ?t Tripuraram Village anrJ Mandal, Nalgonda District and not to transfer the land on the nar.ne of tfre respondent No.6 to 8, to follow the due prQoess of law, not to qancel the P?ttadar passbooks of the petitioner. o OF 024 Petition under Sectron 151 CPC praying that in the crrcumstances.stated in the affidavit flled in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspenii the pperation of the proceedings pursuant to the lmpugned Order vide Procgs. No.B.t187/2022, dated 18.102024 issued by the-4th resPondent, by directing the respondent No.4 not to change revenue records in reppept of the land in'Sy.Nos.62, 63 65 and 66 situated at Tripuraram Village end Man(91, Nalgonda Distiict, and not to make the necessary changes in Dhargni P9rtal on the'iand of the petitror er to an extent of Ac.6 00 gts in sy.No.62, O?,64 and 66 sitggted at Tripuraram Village and Mandal, Nalgohda District end nQt tq tranoter on the name of lhe respondent Nq.6 to 8, tq follow the due prQcess of law, not tg qaQcel the pattadar passbooks of the petitioner pending 9ispqset of the writ petition. Counsql for the Petitioner: SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR Cqunsql for the Respondent No.1 to 4: ASST. GP FOR REVENUE gounsel for the Respondent No.6 to 8: SRI K. CHAITHANYA The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.32417 of 2o24 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is fiied seeking the following reliet "....to issue an order or direction more particularlg one in the nature of Wit of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No 4 in tssuing the Impugned Order vide Procgs- No. B/ 187/2022 dated la 1o2O24 and direcied to rectif'cation of records in respect of the land in Sg'Nos'62' 63, 65 and 66 situated at Tipuraram Village and Manda| Nalgonda Distict and. trying to make the necessary changes in Dharani Portal on the land of the petitioner to an ertent of Ac-6.OO gts in Sy.No.62' 63' 64 and 66 sifirqted at Tripuraram Vitlage and Mandal, Nalgonda Di.st,.ict and trying b cfLange the name of the respondenl lVos.6 to I utithout issuing ang notice tuithout follouing the due process of lau straight aaaV trying to cancel the pattadqr passbooks of the petitioner bg colluding uith the respondent Nos.6 to 8 is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutiorutl and uiolation of Principles of Natural Justice and also in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 30OA of the Constitution of India set aside the same and consequently direct the respondent No 4 not to change reuenue records in respect of the land in Sy.Nos.62, 63, 65 and 66 situated at Tipuraram Village and Manda| Nalgonda Dstict qnd not to mr.ke the necbssary changes in Dharani Portal on the land of the petitioner to an ertent of Ac.6.0O gts in Sg.No.62, 63, 64 and 66 situated 'at Tipuroram Vllage and MandaL Nalgonda District and not to transfer the lind on th.e name of tlte respondent 1Vos.6 to I to follolt) tlle due process of laut not to cancel tle pattadar passbooks of tle petitioner" " "

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

3. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.6-OO guntas in Sy'Nos'62, 63, 65 and 66 situated at Tripuraram Village and Mandal, 2 Nalgonda District, and the revenue authorities have mutated I I his name in the revenue records. It is stated that respondent No.5 herein has instituted a suit in O.S.No. 1O4 of 2Ol2 before the Senior Civil Judge at Miryalaguda, against the petitioner and others, seeking partition and separate possession of the suit schedule propert5r and the said suit was decreed uide judgment and decree, dated 06.1I.2017; and aggrieved thereby, the 'writ petitioner, along with others liled an appeal uide A.S.No. I97 of 2018 before this Court and the same was dismissed uide order, dated 05.O6.2024 by conhrming the judgment and decree, dated 06. 11.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge at Miryalaguda in O.S.No.lO4 of 2012.

4. It is further stated that for implementation of the said decree, the unoflicial respondents have liled an application seeking appointment of the Advocate Comrnissioner for identilication and localization of the subject land and acting on the said application, the Advocate Commissioner inspected the suit schedule property and noticed that the suit schedule propert5r claimed by the petitioner and the unofficial respondents is one and same. It is further stated that the Inspector of Survey has advised the respondents to make an t'? , l 3 application under Section 87 of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317F (for short "L.R.Act, 1317 Fasli") seeking correction of the errors in the revenue records by issuing supplementar5r setwar for the lands in Sy.Nos.62, 63, 65 and 66 situated at situated at Tripuraram Village ald Mandal, Nalgonda District; and by following the procedure, the Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, along with the Deputy Inspector of Survey conducted survey and after verifying the existing survey numbers and extents mentioned therein, a report has peen placed before the Additional Collector. The Additional Collector, duly taking into consideration of the said report, has issued the proceedings vide No.All225l2022, dated 09.06.2022 exercising the powers under Section 87 of the L'R Act, 1317 Fasli for issuance of supplementary setwar for the lands in Sy.Nos.62, 63, 65 and 66 situated at situated at Tripuraram Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District' In pursuarlce of the same, the Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, Nalgonda, prepared supplementary seMar and forwarded the same to respondent No.4 to make changes in the revenue records in respect of the subject propert5r and also recommended. for rectification of entries in the revenue 4 records. Thereafter, the respondent No.4 issued impugned order vide Proc.No.B/ I87 /2022, dated 18.L0.2024. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is hled.

5. Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Additional Collector is not having jurisdiction un<ler Section 84 of the L.R.Act 1317F for passing order for correr:tion of the errors and consequently direct the Assistant Direr:tor, to issue Supplementary Sethwar after expiry of period prescribed. It is further contended that the respondents without following the procedure as contemplated under Sections 87 and 87A of the L.R. Act, 1317F ald without even issuing notices to the affected persons, who are in possession of the properlr and pending adjudication of the claims arising out of the partition suit, has passed impugned order uide proceedings No.B/1.87/2022, dated IB.IO.2O24. lt is also contende:d that the impugned order was passed without adverting to the factual aspects of the matter and therefore, the same is not sustainable.

6. This writ petition is filed questioning the proceedings vide No.B/187 /2022 dated 18. lO.2024 passed by respondent I I /f 5 No.4 recommending for issuance of supplementar5r settrwar and for rectification of the entries in the revenue records' The petitioner has not questioned the proceedings No'A/22512022 dated 09.06.2022 issued by the Additional Collector' which is the basis for issuance of the impugned proceedings dated 18.10.2024 by the respondent No'4' The disputes herein are relating to the identifrcation and change of extent mentioned in the disputed survey numbers' These issues are required to be adjudicated either by the competent civil Court or by the authority constituted under the provisions of the L'R' Act' 1317 Fasli. The grievance of the petitioner is that no notice is issued to him before conducting survey and the said action on the part of respondents amounts to violation of principles of natura,l justice.

7. Since it is the case of the petitioner that no notice is issued to him prior to conducting survey, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is permitted to file an application under Section 166-C of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317F, before the Government' if he is aggrieved with the proceedings dated 09'06'2022 issued by the Additional Collector, within a period of three(3) \ 6 weeksfromthedateofreceiptofcopyofthisorder.Inthe event of frling such application' respondent No' 1 is directed to exarnine the same by duly calling for the connected records and after issuing notice to all the interested parties' pass appropriate orders, in accord'ance with law' Ti1l the disposal of the application to be filed by the petitioner' the Tahsildar is directed not to entertain any applications for rectihcation of entries/change of extent or survey numbers/for issuance of supplementary setwar/change of nature of the lands in respect of the subject property' in any manner' In case' if the petitioner has not frled any application within the time stipulated above, the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate action, in accordance with law'

8. With the above observations' this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs' As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions perrding' if any' shall stand cLosed. I //TRUE COPY// SD/-MOHD.lsMAlL / APSIPTANT REGISTRAR t * * --. .\ livsecrtoruoFFlcER rt\r- To, Secretariai Btrilding, Secretariat flYderaoao . -. 1 The Principal Secretary. Revenue Department' The State of Telangana' '' a . T R: *1** "J :":je, JJi%ofi:Sl #, ilgiJ'l1 {i'i!iij " " N a,s o n d a D i st ri ct ; l* EEi'sL Hf-t,fa$iffi#i:'fji#flit:," .r re a nsa n a a !?uotp con,er .: c o t k a rHtr sra 2 1E nAn 2W I :l FAl crr€o HIGH COURT DATED:0 410212025 ORDER WP.No.32417 af 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0!ort4 a(