T. Sridhar Kumar v. 1. The State of Telangana

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents No. 2 to 4 in not mutating the petitioner's name and not issuing the Patta Pass Book to the petitioner after slot booking dated 10/1 1 12025 with regard to the petitioner's online application no. 2500674419 daled 2411012025 and the challan no. CSil/250016879'1 with respect to the land admeasuring to an extent Ac.10.02 gts in Sy. No. 92lA situated at Polepalle Ramnagar Village, Chinthapalle Mandal and Nalgonda District as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice, apart from violative of Articles i4,19,21 and 300-4 of the r)onstitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent no. 2 to 4 to mutatr: :he petitioner name and issue Patta Pass Book to the petitioner. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 'r 51 cpc praying that in the cirr:r mstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court nay be preased to direct respondents Nos. 2 ro 4 to mutate the petitioner nam: and to issue patta Pass Book, pending disposal of the above Writ petitron. COUNSEI fOr thE PEtitiONEr: SRI RAMAVARAM CHANDRASHE (AR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: SRI L. RAVINDER, AGp FOR F EVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER 7 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.35477 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: "...to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularlg one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaing the action of the respondents No. 2 to 4 in not mutating the petitioners name and rtot issuing the Patta Pass Book to the petitioner after sLot booking doted 1O/ 1 1/ 2025 toith regard to the petitioners online application no.25OO674419 dated 24/ 1O/2025 and the challan no.CSM25OO16B791 tuith respect to the .Iqnd admeasuing to an extent Ac.10.02 gTfs in Sy. No.92/A situated at Polepalle Ramnagar Village, Chinthapalle Mandal and Nalgonda Distict as illegal, arbitrary, in uiolation of pinciples of natural justice, aparl from uiolatiue of Articles 14,19, 21 and 3OO-A of tlrc Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent no.2 to 4 to nutate the petitioner narne and issue Patfa Pass... "

2. Heard Sri Ramavaram Chandrashekar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for the respondents and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the father of the petitioner purchased land to an

4..J, / i Page 2 of5 extent of Acs.1O.O2 guntas in different survel, I umbers i.e., Acs.2.32 guntas 1n Sy.No.92/U, Ac. i.16 guntas Sy.No.92lAA, Acs.2.32 guntas in Sy.No.92,'JU, Ac.i.16 guntas and Ac. 1.26 guntas in Sy.No.92/A an: Sy.No.92/1, situated at Poiepalli Ramnagar Village, )evarakonda Chinthapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District from Pc,l :pa11y Pedda Jangaiah, Vaipaka Ramulu, Kudiduti Ram -, .u, Vaipaka Lakshmamma and Vaipaka Narsamma, throug: a registered sale deed bearing document No.3353/:) )O2, dated lB.1,O.2OO2. Digital Pattedar Passbook has b: rn issued in favour of the father of the petitioner Lti: = Passbook No.T2BO5OO20719 with Khata No.9B7. After .l Le demise of the lather of the petitioner, the petitioner herein has succeeded the subject land. Since then, the pe -itioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the r r-rbject land undisputedly.

4. Later on, the petitioner has made an onlitt r application No.25OO674419. dated 24.1O.2025 for mutatiotr of l-ris name in the revenue records. The petitioner approached respondent No.3 and has booked slot on Li .11 .2025 at 7 Page 3 of5 12:00 P.M for mutation of his name in respect of the subject land. The siblings of the petitioner were present physically and expressed their free will and consent before respondent No.3 on the said date. But the respondent-authorities failed to consider the same. They neither specified any reason not taken steps to mutate the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. Aggrieved by the said inaction, the petitioner preferred the present writ petition

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for revenue on instructions would submit that prior to filing of the succession mutation application by the petitioner, the persons namely, Koduti Shankar S/o Lakshmaiah, Koduti Mutyalu S/o Lakshrraiah, Koduti Madaru S/o Jamlya, Koduti Ramulu S/o Jangayya, Koruti Venkatayya S/o Jangayya, Vaipaka Yadayya S/o Venka5rya, Vaipaka Anjay_va S/o Ramulu, Polepalli Poshalya S/o Chandrayya, Polepalli Shankar S/o Kishtayya and others ar-rd me residents of Polepalli Ramnagar village, Chintapalli Mandai, Nalgonda District have filed a representation before respondent No.2 on 22-9-2025 and stated that, after getting drunk by their \ Pagc 4 of5 elders, the father of the petitioner namely T.Rar i Kumar has got their signatures for transfer the subject ands in his name. When, the petitioner herein and his da- 3hter Sunita Devi have approached respondent No.4 lor sanction of succession mutation of the subject lands, tL t y have filed objection before respondent No.4 and stopped :he sanction of succession mutation stating that, the petiti,r rer is not in the physical possession of the subject lands it , claimed by the petitioncr. Whereas, they are in the contin-; rus physical possession over the subject lands from the kxr 1 period and requested not to sanction succession mutation c I the subject lands in the name of the petitioner herein.

6. He further submitted that the matter ';r as enquire cl locally and it was revealed that, the petition:r is not in ph_vsical possession of the subject lands. Hence, the StlCCC SSION application filed by the petitiorr )r was not considered.

7. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circr mstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that thc, respondent- authorities rvithout assigning aly specific l3ason have 7 Page 5 ol5 simply not considered the mutation application made by the petitioner, which is arbitrary and unconstitutional. B Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent-authorities to consider the Application No.2500674419, dated 24.1O.2025 submitted by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law by putting the petitioner and all interested parties on notice and alfording them an opportunity. If respondent_authorities are not inclined to accept the request made by the petitioner, thev shall pass an order assigning specific reasons and communicate copy of the said order to the petitioner. Thev shall complete the entire exercise as expeditiousl-y AS possible. There sha1l be no order as to costs As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, il any, pending, shall stand dismissed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.P. PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (->' To SECTION OFFTCER 1 . The Principjr.l Selretary - Revenue Department, State of Telangana, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar r erangana State Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The District Collector, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District, Telangana Stgte. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devarakonda, Nalgonda District, Telangana State. 4. The Tahsildar, Chinthapalle Mandal, Nalgonda Districl, Telangana State. 5. One CC to SRI RAMAVARAM CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY, Advocate [OpUCl 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad_ [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies {e. tVIP i. I HIGH COURT " DATI:.D:2111112025 i, i';'='r.. ( ,:.8 .l .Jt I I 0 ,+ 22 ':'t ?W r1 '.'\ :,.1 *-- 7 ORDER WP.No. |5477 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE VI' RIT PETITION WIT{OUT COSTS ER '.:.: .