1. Konguri Sathyanarayana v. The State of Telangana

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 WriUs, Order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in issuing certified copies of file bearing Nos. L/329/1975, AL132911975, Li6636/1993, L133011975, L187611975 and L129212023 in Sy No. 1761, Rl Report, Panchanama report of Shabad Village, Shabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent Nos.3 and 4 to forthwith issue the certified copies of file bearing Nos. 1i329/1975, AL132911975, L/6636/1993, L133011975, L187611975 and L129212O23 in Sy No. 1761, Rl Report, Panchanama report of Shabad Village, Shabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circ:t mstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court nay be pleased to issue interim directions to the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 t) issue the certified copies of file bearing Nos.L/329/1975, AL132911975, L/66-1( /1993, L133011975' L187611975 and Lt292t2023 in Sy No. 1761, Rl Report, Pztr chanama report of Shabad Village, Shabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District' perr ing disposal of the WP. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI P.SHIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents No.1to4: SRI L.RAVINDER, A( P FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE E'V'VENUC'OPAL WRIT PEIITION No.35247 of 20.25 ORDER: Aggrieved by the inaction of respondent Nos'3 and 4 in issuing copies of lrle bearing No. file bearing Nos.Ll329 11975' AL/329 11975' Ll6636lrgg3, Ll33O/tg75, L187611975 and L129212023 in Survey No.1761, RI report and panchanama report of Shabad (V & M)' Rangareddy District, the present writ petition is filed' A consequential prayer is sought to direct respondent Nos'3 ald 4 to forthwith issue the certified copies of the above referred documents' 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr' L'Ravinder' learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.l to 4' 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are in need of certifred copies pertaining to file bearing Nos.Ll 329 I 1975, ALl32g I rg75' L16636 I r9s3' Ll 33o I 1975' L/8761 1975 and L/2g212O23 in Survey No'1761' RI report and panchanama report of Shabad (V & M)' Rangareddy District' It is further submitted that the certif,red copies though have been provided to the petitioner on the RTI application made by the petitioner' But those certif,red copies of the documents issued through the RTI apglication have not been considered for marking the same before the 2 *.] civil court, where the petitioner has frled a civil suit r ide o.s.No.9o of 2025 on the file of learned Senior civil Judge, Rangi.eddy District at Chevella. Aggrieved thereby, necessary representrL ions have been made to all official respondents and the official respr ndent No.2 uid"e memo No.A6 /67 /2025, dated 19.03.2025, had direct:d the petitioner to approach the Revenue Divisiona-l officer (for short "RDo), chevella i.e. offrcial respondent No.3 seeking certihed copies. Accordingly, the petitioner has approached the said authority. But n: action has been taken so far by the official respondent No.3 on th: representation made by the petitioner on07.1l.2o2s. Due to such iraction of officia.l respondent No.3, the petitioner is constrained to file ,his writ petition seeking appropriate directions.

4. Learned Assistant Government pleader on .he other hand submitted that the petitioner ought to have nade necessary application under Rule 1 1 of the Rules made under li hu Bharathi Act, 2025 and' that the said provision clearly facilities frr issua.ce of the certified copies. In the absence of hling such application, the petitioner is making representation to the official arr horities and due to the prevailing rules, the official authorities are n,). in a position to consider the case of the petitioner and for such con;ideration, it will take ample time and hence under these circumstan I rs, seeks to pass appropriate orders. 3

5. This court having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue, deems it appropriate to grant liberty to the petitioner to Iile necessary application through online under Rule 11 of the Rules made under Bhu.Bharathi Act, 2o2s. upon filing the same, it is needless to mention that the official respondents shalr act upon such apprication ald take necessary action strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible preferabry within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6 With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications if any pending in this petition, sha-ll stand closed. //TRUE COPY/I SD/-C.DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G CTION SE OFFICER To, The Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Telangana State' Hyderabad The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana' The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana' The Tahsildar, Shabad Mandal, Rangareddy District, Telangana' One CC to SRI P.SHIVA REDDY, Advocate' [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana Two CD CoPies. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BSK BS 4L HIGH COURT DATED:2011112025 ORDER WP.No.35247 of 2025 I I Is I. aL : I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1 t \1/