Disposed

T. Nagaraja, v. The Secretary to Government

Telangana HC6 Aug 2004WP/13840/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of three writ petitions seeking mutation of names and issuance of pattadar passbooks for purchased land. The court held that petitioners failed to apply for mutation in the prescribed manner as per Rule 18. They were allowed to approach the officer again, and the officer was directed to consider such applications within three months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to approach Mandal Revenue Officer with fresh applications in proper form; officer directed to decide within three months.

T. Nagaraja, Vs The Secretary to Government — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2004)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION Nos.13840,13841 and 1390 of 2004

¶7

Between:

¶8

T. Nagaraja, S/o Late Narayana Swamy, R/o Plot No. 61 HMT Colony, Miyapur, Hyderabad,

¶9

rep. by his GPA Mohd. Vasi Siddique S/o Sufi M.A. Siddique, Age 39 yrs, Business, R/o H.No. 10-4-771/643/1, Masabtank,

¶10

Humayun Nagar,Hyderabad - 500 028.

¶11

..... PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1 The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Govt. of A.P., at Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶14

2 The Chief Commissioner,Land Administration, Govt. of A.P, at Abids,

¶15

Hyderabad.

¶16

3 The Collector, Ranga Reddy District, at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶17

4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶18

.....RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 herein in not mutating the name of the petitioner in the revenue records and issuing the pattedar pass book and title deeds in respect of land bearing Sy.No. 101/1/C admeasuring Ac. 10-20 Guntas, situated at Miyapur village, Serilingampally mandal, R.R. District, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4

¶20

herein to conduct an enquiry and implement the directions given by the 2nd respondent through Letter Ref. No. ROM/ROR1/277/04 dt. 12-4-2004, and to grant such other relief or reliefs.

¶21

(2) WRIT PETITION NO : 13841 of 2004

¶22

Between:

¶23

1 K.V. Krishnam Raju, S/o Sita Rama Raju, R/o Plot No. 554, Pragathinagar, Opp: JNTUC,

¶24

Kukatpally, Hyderabad.

¶25

2 Ch.Nirmala , W/o C. Visweswara Rao, Vivekanandhanagar Colony, Kukatpally,

¶26

Hyderabad - 500 072.

¶27

..... PETITIONERS

¶28

AND

¶29

1 The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Govt. of A.P.,

¶30

at Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶31

2 The Chief Commissioner, Land Administration,, Govt. of A.P.,

¶32

At Abids, Hyderabad.

¶33

3 The Collector, Ranga Reddy District, at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶34

4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶35

.....RESPONDENTS

¶36

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 herein in not mutating the names of the petitioners in the revenue records and issuing the pattedar pass book and title deeds in respect of land bearing Sy.No. 77 (Part) admeasuring Ac. 1-25 Guntas, situated at Hafeezpet village, Serilingampally mandal, R.R. District, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 herein to conduct an enquiry and implement the directions given by the 2nd respondent through Letter CCLA's Ref.No. ROM/ROR1/414/04 dt. 24-6-2004, and to grant such other relief or reliefs.

¶37

(3) WRIT PETITION NO : 13910 of 2004

¶38

Between:

¶39

1 A. A. Rama Raju S/o Late Soma Raju, aged 52 years,

¶40

R/o 35, Journalist Colony, Road No.3 Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-2 2 A. dhana Lakshmi W/o A.A. Rama Raju, aged 48 years,

¶41

R/o 35, Journalist Colony, Road No.3 Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-34

¶42

3 A.Suryanarayana Raju S/o Late Soma Raju, aged 49 years,

¶43

R/o 35, Journalist Colony, Road No.3 Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-34

¶44

4 A. Padmavathi W/o A.Suryanarayana Raju, aged 48 years, R/o 35, Journalist Colony, Road No.3 Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-34 All are represented by their GPA Holder, Sri B.D. Prathapa Varma, S/o B.V.R.K. Raju, aged 35 years, Occ: Business, R/o 8-3-976/32, Shalivahana Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶45

..... PETITIONERS

¶46

AND

¶47

1 The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Government of A.P., at Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶48

2 The Chief Commissioner, Land Administratiion, Government of A.P., at Abids, Hyderabad.

¶49

3 The Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶50

4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶51

.....RESPONDENTS

¶52

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus,

¶53

declaring the action of the respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein in not complying with the directions of the 2nd respondent in Reference No. ROM/ROR1/344/04, dated 18-052004 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the orders passed in W.P. No. 3159/97 dt 19-2-1997 and consequently direct the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 to mutate the names of the petitioners in the revenue records in respect of Sy. No. 46, (Part) admeasuring 10.00 acres, situated at Raidurg Paigah Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶54

Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.PALLE NAGESWAR RAO (In all WPs) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1to4:GP FOR REVENUE(In all WPs) The Court made the following:

¶55

COMMON ORDER:

¶56

In all these matters, the petitioners claim to have purchased the properties in Survey Nos.101/1/C, 77 (Part) and 46 (Part) of Miyapur village, Hafeezpet village and Raidurg Paigah village respectively in Serilingampally Mandal, under registered sale deeds. They made applications to the Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally to mutate their names in the revenue records and also issue pattadar passbooks and title deeds, in vain. Therefore, they are before this Court seeking direction to the fourth respondent to accept the applications of the petitioners and issue pattadar passbooks.

¶57

With the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court has gone through the applications made by the petitioners for pattadar passbooks. As per Rule 18 of the A.P. Rights in Land & Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989 (for short ‘the Rules’), a person acquiring a right in the land has to intimate the same fact to the Mandal Revenue Officer in Form No. VI(A). The petitioners have admittedly not made such application. Therefore, giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Mandal Revenue Officer again and apply in a proper form as per Rule 18 of the Rules, the writ petitions are disposed of. As and when such applications are made, the Mandal Revenue Officer shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within three months thereafter.

¶58

The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.

¶59

Date : August 06, 2004. V.V.S. RAO,J

¶60

¶61

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SECTION OFFICER

1 The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Government of A.P., at Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶66

2 The Chief Commissioner, Land Administratiion, Government of A.P., at Abids, Hyderabad.

¶67

3 The Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶68

4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶69

5 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Revenue,

¶70

High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (O.U.T)

¶71

6 Two CD copies.

T. Nagaraja, v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Nagaraja, v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Penumatcha Ramakrishna Raju, Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer

Ganga Drip Pipe Systems Vs the Sbh/Chief Manager/Hyd and Another

Sita School of Nursing, Vs Indian Nursing Council, Combined Councils Buildings

D.R.Venkatesh, Vs The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

M/s. U. Foam Private Limited, Vs The Commissioner

Dodda Srinivasa Rao S/o Subba Rao Vs District Panchayat Officer