Vemulamanda Rama Raju, S/o. Occ Business, Fl/o. Quarter No Sanga Reddy District v. SatyanarayanaRaju, Aged about

Petition under Article 226 oI the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents No. 2 and 3 herein including the Petitioner land admeasuring Ac. 4.00 guntas, in Sy No. 15/4, situated at Allapur Village, MarpallyMandal, Vikarabad District in the Prohibitory List without there being any specific court order and without issuing any notice and without following the procedure contemplated under the law is being illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia contrary to the provisions contemplated uMer the BhuBharati Scheme and rules made thereunder and consequently direct the respondents No' 2 and 3 herein to delete the petitioner's land admeasuring Ac. 4.00 guntas, in Sy No 15/4, situated at Allapur Village, MarpallyMandal, Vikara rad District from the prohibitory list IANO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the c r ;umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court m'r ' be pleased to direct the respondents No. 2 and 3 heiein to delete the petitioner's rnd admeasuring Ac. 4.00 guntas, in Sy No. 15/4, situated at Allapur Villa ;e' MarpallyMandal' VikarabadDistrictfromtheprohibitorylistpendingdisp':;alofthemainwrit petition, Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl KOPPULA GOPAL Counsel for the Respondents: SRI L. RAVINDER AGP FOll REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER I a-i { I I I I i THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.32 641 of2O2S ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is frled seeking the following relief " ...to isgte an appropiate wit order or d'irection more particttlarlg one in tle nature of WRIT OF MANDAM|IS declaring tle action of the respondents Nos.2 and 3 herein including the Petitioner land admeasuing Acs.4.OO gantas in Sg No'15/4' situaled at Allapur Vittage, Marpallg Mandal, Vikarabad Distncl irt the Prohibitory List uithout therebeing any specific court order and tttithout issuing any ttotice and tuithout following the proedure contemplated under the ktLu is being iilegal arbitrary unreasonable and uiolatiue of Article 14 and 3OOA of the Constitutiort oJ- Irt)ia cotttrary to the prouisiorts contemplated under tlrc BlruBharati Scheme and tubs made thereunder and consequerttly direct tle respondents Nos.2 a nd 3 lrcrein to delete the petitioners land. admeasuring Acs 4'O0 qutttcts itt 'Sg.No.15/4 situoted at Allapur Village, Marpallg Mcutdctl' Vikarabad Distdlct from tle prohibitory list"'"

2. Heard Sri Koppula Gopal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for the responcients and perlrsed the record . Page 2 ofS

3. l,earned counsel appearing for the pe.-i -ioner would submit that the petitioner herein is the absohr e owner and possessor of land to an extent of Acs.4.o ) guntas in Sy.No.15/a, situated at Allapur Village, Marg ally Mandal, Vikarabad District, having acquired the same I y virtue of a registered sale deed bearing document No.55(r 2021, dated

27.O2.2O21. From the date of purchase, the Jrr titioner is in continuous possession and enjoyment of the subject propert_v. Subsequently, the petitioner ap p :oached the revenue authorities seeking to mutate his I ame in the revenue rccords and inturn, his narne s mutated. Thereafter, the petitioner approached responder t-authorities to issue digital passbooks and inturn, the Cr vernment of Telangana issued digital pattedar passbook b. ' confirming the title in respect of the petitioner. 4- Later on, the petitioner approached respor dent no.3 to get the market value certificate intending to alienate the subject property and obtained the Dharan. portal and surprisingly, the subject land is under prohibi ory list and u;hi:n the same w;s questioned, respondent No I stated that 4 I a Court Case is pending before the comPetent Civil Court and subsequently, the petitioner enquired into the matter and came to know that one Smt. Eshwaramma filed a Civil Suit uide O.S.No.97 of 2021. The said Eshwaramma mentioned the schedule 83 property in respect of land to an extent of Acs.7.OO guntas in Sy.No.15 and because of status quo order gralted by the Civil Court, respondent No'3 included the land of the petitioner only in the prohibitory list eventhough the petitioner is no way concerned with the suit proceedings and there is no specifically mentioned that in respect of the which proPerty in Sy.No'l5, the Court has granted status quo, but respondent Nos.2 and 3 illegally included the land of the petitioner to an extent ol Acs 4 00 guntas in Sy.No.l5/ 4 /2. Heoce, the present u'rit petition'

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that basing on the order passed bv the Civil Court in O.S.No.97 of 2021, the land of the petitioner \\'as included in the list of prohibitory properties.

6. As discussed supra, if there is any dispute with regard to the identification of subject property/ suit scheclule Page 4 ofS property, to demarcate the land, the petilione: has to file an application under Order XXVI Rule 9 of C.P.C. to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to demarcate the lanc, conduct the survey through the Mandal Surveyor/ Governr rent Surveyor and file a report, upon which, it is for the ,)ivil Court to consider the same and pass appropriate orderi

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dispos,: I of, granting liberty to the petrtioner to submit an appiicati{)r L under Order XXVI Rule 9 of C.P.C. to appoint an Advocate )ommissioner for demarcation of the land and to conduct survey of the subject propertv with the help of the Mandal Surveyor/ Covernment Surveyor. Upon re:eipt of the Advocate Commissioner's Report, it is for the livil Court to consider thc same and pass appropriate order i. Thereafter, it is left opcn for the petitioner to make an apl) ication as per the relevant provision of Bhu Bharati Act, 201,5 for deletion of the subject propertv from the list of prohib:t rry properties and upon filing the same, the respondent-anr horities shall act upon and pass appropriate orders in a<:r ordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. i I I I I /// /'' Page 5 ofs As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand dismissed. SD/- A.SREENIVASA RE ASSISTANT RE R //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, Stamps and Registration Department Secretariat buildings, State of Telangana, Hyderabad. 2- The District Registrar, Stamps and Registration Department Vikarabad, District at Vikarabad

3. The Tahsildar, And Joint Sub Registrar, MarpallyMandal, Vikarabad District 4. One CC to SRl. KOPPULA GOPAL, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad . [OUT]

6. Two CD Copies DAN TKS Lk, HIGH COURT DATED:2911012025 I ) I ORDER WP.No.32641 ot 202i HES o( , t rt , ii r, g 2t}2f, z * S DT _r+. +r{irr* DISPOSTNG OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS *.4' Tis t-e lz lee ..r.,.r.**t*ran a..- r,:.1:iL.::',i