Disposed

S. Lingamaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC26 Jan 2018WP/44266/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner complained that his application for pattadar passbooks and title deeds submitted in December 2014 remained unacted upon by the Tahsildar. The court analyzed the relevant statutory provisions and directed the respondent to consider the application and pass orders within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 4th respondent to consider the application of Form-VI (A) and pass appropriate orders within four months.

S. Lingamaiah Vs The State of Telangana — Specific Performance | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No. 44266 OF 2017

¶2

O R D E R :

¶3

The main complaint of the petitioner is that he had submitted an Application in Form-VI (A) on 12.12.2014 itself for issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.0.20 guntas in Survey No. 5/A, Chowderiguda Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, but however, the 4^th respondent Tahsildar, Shamshabad Mandal has not acted thereon.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana).

¶5

It is appropriate to notice that in terms of Section 4 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short, ‘the Act’), any person acquiring, by succession or survivorship or inheritance or by partition or by way of a decree from a Court any right as owner, pattadar, mortgagee, occupant or tenant of a land, shall intimate, in writing, his/her acquisition of such right to the Mandal Revenue Officer within 90 days from the date of such acquisition and then, the Mandal Revenue Officer shall give an acknowledgment of the receipt of such intimation. Thereafter, under Section 5 of the said Act, the Mandal Revenue Officer shall determine as to whether and, if so, in what manner, the Record of Rights may be amended in consequence of the application made and carry out necessary amendments in the Record of Rights in accordance with such determination. It will also be appropriate to notice that Rules were also framed in 1989 for giving effect to the provisions of the Act and as per Rule 9, after

¶6

¶7

due completion of enquiry, the recording authority shall pass orders in respect of cases requiring change of registry necessitated by succession, when it is not disputed. Form VI (A) is prescribed as the proper form for intimation of acquisition of rights in terms of Section 4 of the Act, as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 18 of the Rules.

¶8

Inasmuch as the petitioner had submitted the Application in the prescribed format i.e., Form VI(A), I deem it appropriate to direct the 4^th respondent to consider the same, within a period of four months from today, in exercise of the powers under Section 5 of the Act and the Rules made there under and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law.

¶9

With this, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶10

Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any shall also stand disposed of.

¶11

____________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 26^th December 2016 ksld

S. Lingamaiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Lingamaiah v. The State of Telangana

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

Rangu Satyavathi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M. Rangamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

N. Harish Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kum. a.Jyoshna Vs State of Telangana

Kollareddy Laxmirajyam Vs State of Telangana

E. Venkateswarlu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh