Disposed

Madamanchi Venkateswarlu, v. The Mandal Revenue Officer

Telangana HC18 Dec 2006WP/24769/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order in Writ Petition No.24769 of 2006 directed the Mandal Revenue Officer, Khammam, to proceed with issuing pattadar passbooks and title deeds to legal heirs of Pedda Narsaiah within three months from the date of the order, following a previous instruction to incorporate their names in the Pahanies.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.1 to issue PPBs and TDs within three months from the date of receipt of the order copy.

Madamanchi Venkateswarlu, Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2006)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.24769 of 2006

¶3

Dated 18.12.2006 Between: Madamanchi Venkateswarlu and others. AND The Mandal Revenue Officer, Khammam, and another.

¶4

..... Petitioners

¶5

.....Respondents

¶6

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO WRIT PETITION No.24769 of 2006

¶7

ORDER:

¶8

All the petitioners are legal heirs of late Pedda Narsaiah, who was owner of land admeasuring Acs.380.00 in survey No.262 situated at Sarapaka Village, Burgampad Mandal in Khammam District. They approached respondent No.1 by making representation requesting for mutation of their names in Pahanies. It appears that they also approached respondent No.2, who by letter dated 17.09.2005 advised respondent No.1 to look into the matter. After conducting enquiry, respondent No.1 addressed letter dated 30.06.2006 to respondent No.2 informing that the names of the petitioners shall be incorporated in the Pahanies left over from 1986-1987 till date. Thereafter, the petitioners approached respondent No.1 on 19.10.2006 requesting for issuance of pattadar passbooks (PPBs) and title deeds (TDs). As there was no immediate response, instant writ petition is filed seeking a direction to respondent No.1 to issue PPBs and TDs.

¶9

The matter was heard on 29.11.2006. The same was adjourned on two occasions to enable the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General-T) to get instructions in the matter. In spite of granting sufficient time, the learned Government Pleader did not get any instructions. Therefore, instead of keeping the matter pending, it would be proper for this Court to dispose of the writ petition directing respondent No.1 to proceed with the matter in accordance with law pursuant to letter bearing Rc.No.B/2727/2005 dated 30.06.2006 addressed by respondent No.1 to respondent No.2 informing that the names of all the petitioners shall be incorporated in the Pahanies and after conducting necessary enquiry, the petitioners’ case for PPBs and TDs may be considered. This exercise may be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶10

The writ petition, with the above observations and directions, is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶11

_____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 18^th December, 2006 Note: Issue CC in one week. B/o ghn

Madamanchi Venkateswarlu, v. The Mandal Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madamanchi Venkateswarlu, v. The Mandal Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Narasimha Vs The Mandal Revenue officer, Serilingampally Mandal

Jfaggaiahpet Jamiya Majid Tenants Welfare Association Vs The Government of a.P., represented by its Prl.

Padma Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its

Seguri Jangaiah, Vs A.P. Khadi and Village Industries

Mr. A.P. Rangaiah S/o a. Ratnaiah Vs M/s. M.a. Bari and b .Shyamasundara Rao Advocates

B. Shankar, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer