) THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE lrl{=f,I{rll THE v. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION NO: 353

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 a Writ of Certiorari- (A)Calling for records relating to and connected to thefmpugned order of the Respondent No. 2 vide Proceedings No. DCORJAN/D1/RORy o2941202i, dated 25.07.2025 and quash or set-aside the same holding it as bad, arbitrary, illegal and violation of natural justice. "ir 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 pleased to suspend all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order of the Respondenl No. 2 vide Proceedings No.DCORJAN/D1IROR/029412025, daled

25.O7.2025, including the resumption of the subject land admeasuring Ac.1-20 Gts. in Sy.No. 237120 of Obulapur Village and filing of any criminal complaint against the Petitioner Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PUSAPATI SUBBA RAJU Counsel for Respondents: Ms. SNEHITA, .AGP FOR ASSIGNMENT The Court made the followtng: ORDER a I f, ,: ? i.: t ":r.. .-- .l THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No. 35343 of 2o25 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking the follou'ing relief:- "...calling for records relating to and connected to the impugned order of respondent No.2 uide Proceedings No.DCORJAN/D1/ROR/0294 12025, dated 25.07.2025 and quash or set aside the same holding it as bad, arbitrary, illegal and violation of natural justice..."

2. Heard Sri Pusapati Subba Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Snehita, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignment appearing for the respondents and with their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage. ?

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that i' the husband of the petitioner by name Mennei Narsinga Rao, S/o. Ramarao, was assigned the land admeasuring Ac. 1.20 guntas in Sy.No.237 l2O, situated at Obulapur Village, Thangallapalli Mandal, R4janna Sircilla District uide Patta Certificate bearing No.1056/96/199 in the- \ 2 EVV, J Wp_35343_2025 month of December, 1996 and her husbancl,s narne rvas mutated in all the revenue records as pattadar. Learned co'.rn scl frrr the petitioner .,vould further submit that the husband of the petitioner died on29.07.2006 and after his death, the petitioner has succeeded to the said 1and and her name r,r,as mutated in all the revenue records and she was also issued pattada-r passbook bearing No.T19090090871 uide Khata No.1263. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, acting on the complaint lodged by one Ramchander Rao, respondent No.2 had called for a report from respondent No.3 and accordingly, respondent No.3 had submitted his report urde Lr.No.B/34/2025, dated 20.06.2025 stating that, on verification of the office records, the amendment register for the year 1997-98 is not available and it is noticed that the husband of the petitioner,s narne was_. brought into records and after his demise, the lald was transferred to the name of the petitioner. It is further stated in the report that, during the enquiry, it is founci that the husband of the petitioner is a Government servant and he is not a r '.?..--...,'.---- "f 3 EW, J Wp_353a3 2025 landless poor person and requested to take necessary action. Basing on the said report, respondent No.2 issued the impugned proceedings, dated 25,07.2025 directing respondent No.3 to resume the subject land. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, without issuing any notice to the petitioner in whose favour pattadar passbook was issued and her rights have been effected, the impugned proceedings for resuming the subject land amounts to violation of principles of natural justice.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 would submit that the petitioner ought to have approached tfi. official respondents if she is aggrieved by the impugned proceedings by filing a revision before the appropriate authority but the petitioner, without availfi:g the said remedy, rushed to this Court at a premature stage. 4 -+ E\TV, J Wp 35343_2025

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on examination of the impugned order nowhere it is stsrted that the petitioner is put on notice

6. A Full Bench of this Court in Chinna;m Pqndurangam a. Mandal Revenue OfJicer, Serilingampallg Mandal q.nd othersl, had categorically held that, before correction/amendment/ change of the revenue records, a notice has to be issued to the interested persons, whcse n€unes are reflected in the revenue records.

7. In the instant case also, the name of the petitioner was found in all the revenue records and she was also issued pattadar passbook under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, ! 2O2O but nc notice was issued to her before passing the impugned order directing the Tahsildar to resume the subject land. Therefore, it is a clear case of violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 1run zooS Rp L5 5 EW, J Wp_35343_2025 B. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings bearing No.DCORJAN/ D 1/ ROR/029412025, dated 25.07.2025 issued by respondent No.2 is hereby set aside. However, this order does not preclude the official respondents to take appropriate action by following the procedure strictly in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

9. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. A.SRINIVASA REDDY STANT REGIS SECTION OFFICER \ To, 1 2 3 4 5.

6. MBC tourl\ . Two CD Copies G i1 -l / HIGH COURT DATED: 2011112025 ORDER WP.No.35343 of 2025 v\ 0o t 1 EL{ S 14 12 1{0tl m6 Dz * TCPA i ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS