The High Court · 2025

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 pleased to issue a writ order or direction particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to rectify the revenue records by mutating the name of the petitioner for Ac.1-30 gts of land in sy.No.381/B of Nidigonda Village, Raghunathapally Mandal, Jangoan District by declaring the mutation of the 6th respondent name in the revenue records for Ac.1-30 gts in Sy.No.3g1/B of Nidigonda Village. Raghunathapally Mandal, Jangoan District is without any basis as illegal and arbitrary. - lA NO: 1 OF 202! Petition urrder section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fi ed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents to suspend the mutation of the 6th Respondent name in the revenue records for an extent of Ac.1-30 gts of rand in sy.No.3g1/B of Nidigonda virage, Raghunathapafly Mandar, Jangoan District and kept these lands under prohibitory rist as disputed category in Revenue Records pending disposal of the main Writ petition. Counsel for the t,etitioner: SRt c. RAMACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Flespondents No.1 to 4: SRI L. RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the F:espondent No.5: Gp FOR AGRICULTURE Gounsei forthe Respondent No.6: _ The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELAT{GANA AT HYDERABAI) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL IIIRIT PETITION .33453 of 2O2S DATE OF ORDER: 23.L2.2O25 Between: Shahenaz Sultana AND Petitioner The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretdry, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, and others ...Respondents ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: "...to issue a uit order or direction particularlg in the nature of Wit of Mandamus directing the respondents to rectdy the reuenue records bg mutating the name of the petitioner for Ac.1-3O gts of land in Sg.No.3Bl/B of Nidigonda Village, Raghunathapallg Mandal, Jangoan District by declaring the mutation of the 6th respondent. Page2 of7 name in the reuenue records fo, Ac.1-30 gts in SA.Nct.3Bl / B of Nidigonda Village. Raghunathapally Manal.al, Jangoan District is without any basis as illegal and c,.rbitrary......"

2. Heard Sri Ramachandra Reddy, learned counsel appearingJ for the petitioner and sri L.Ravind.er, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenlle, for respond.ent Nos. L to zt, and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the dispute involved in the present writ petition is about 'the entries in the revenue records with regard to Ac. 1.30 5gntas of land in sy.No.38 1 after sub-division 3BL /8, s,ituated at Nidigonda village, Raghunathapally Mandal, .langoan District. originally, Sri Vendantha Nara Hari swamy and others and Kistapati Narsi Reddy and others wer:e the pattedars and title holders of Ac. L.g4 guntas of land in sy.No.asr, Acs.2.25 guntas in sy.No.604 and Acs.2.o6 gunas in sy.No.613/B of Nidgunta village. Later or, these pattedars have sold their lands to one Devara Narsammrt through a simple sale deed executed on

29.lo.tg7l and 25.07.1964. These simple sale deedqwere Page 3 of7 got regulafized under section 5-A RoR Act and issued forms 13(b) and 13(c) in Mandal Revenue officer proceedings uzde Rc.No.9 L7 194, dated 19.10.1995. After the said regrilarization the said Devara Narsamma n€rme is mutated in the revenue records and issued pattedar passbook in her favour.

4. As far as the title and possession of the said Devara Narsamma for the lands to an extent of Ac. t.34 guntas in Sy.Nos.381, Acs.2.25 guntas in Sy.No.6O4 and Acs.2.06 guntas in Sy.No.6L3/8, is not in dispute. While So, the petitioner has purchased Ac.1.30 guntas in sy.No.381 which is later given sub-division No.3B1/B from the said Devara Narsamma through registered sale deed on 20.03 .2oLT with document No.758 of 2oL7 on the file of the learned Joint Sub-Registrar, Ghanpur Station. After the purchase, the petitioner applied to the Tahsildar Raghunathapalli under section 64, of RoR Act for mutation of her narne in the revenue records on 3o.o4.2ol7. Pursuant to the said application of the petitioner, the Tahsildar followed .due process and issued mutation proceedings in his proceedings No.Rc.No.B/26O3/2OL7, dated 26.10.2017 - Pursuant to the mutation proceedings, it is the duty of the revenue authoritios to take up follow-up activities changing the revenue records and ultimately issue patteda-r passbook. In spite of the petitioner's request for taking up follow up activities, the revenue authorities dodging the same for the reasons b,est known to them.

5. The revenue authorities instead of mutating the name of the pr:titioner in the revenue record, contrary to the mutation proceedings issued under Section 64 of ROR Act, in collusion with respondent No.6, have mutated the name of respondent No.6 in the revenue records and the said fact got establishr:d by the information furnished in the Memo issued by the 'Iahsildar under Right to Information Act on

26.O9.2OitO. After receiving such information, the petitioner frled Revision before the Special Tribunal on O2.O2.2O21. The said revision is closed due to new act is promulgated i.e., Bhu Bha.,:ati Act, 2025. Meanwhile, the Act under which 7 /r' Page 5 of7 revision is filed i.e., the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattedar Passbooks Act, 2O2O got repealed and replaced with The telangana Bhu Bharati Act (Record of Rights in Land) Act, 2025. Even under the new Act, as per Section 5(1) mutation has to be effected. After such mutation under Section 5(5) entries in revenue records has to be amended. After that under Section 5(7) pattedar passbooks has been issued. These are a1l sequential acts automatically undertaken by the revenue authorities. As far as the entries in the revenue record and proper maintenance of them is covered by the new act and the Civil Court jurisdiction is barred under the new Act. The duty of the revenue authorities under the new act is not carried out. Aggrieved by the sarne, the petitioner preferred the present writ petition

6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted the petitioner ought to have filed necessary application before the official respondents and in the absence of filing such application before the concerned Page 6 ofl authoritit:s, rushing to this Court by filing writ petition seeking appropriate directions at a premature stage, is complete.Ly misconceived and seeks to pass appropriate orders

7. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case rrnd upon perusing the material available on record, this Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application under the relevant provisions of Bhu Bharati Act, 2025, upon filing such app,lication, the respondent-authorities shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law by putting the petitioner and respondent No.6 on notice an:Ld affording them €rn opportunity of hearing. Il responderet-authorities are not inclined to accept the request made by the petitioner, they shall assign specific reasons, pass a reitsoned order, communicate a copy of the said order to the pe:titioner and complete the said exercise within a period of 9O working days from the date of receipt of the - application which is going to be filed by the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. SD/. P. PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To l.ThePrincipalsecretary,RevenueDepartment,StateofTelangana' Secretariat, HYderabad - 5OOO22.

2. The District Collector, Jangaon. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangaon. 4. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Raghunathpally, Jangaon District' 5. The Aoricultural Extension officer (AEO), Agriculture office, Nidigonda, RaghuriathpallY Mandal, Jangaon.

6. One CC to SRI G. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

8. Two CD Copies MP HIGH COURT DATED:2311212025 \ HE SIA ( o 0 s ttB 2026 (-1 ;;'t t. {)i- t -?/ ORDER WP.No.33453 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \\ +