Allowed

KeshaboinaShivaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC30 Oct 2019WP/14049/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition regarding mutation of land titles, directing the Tahsildar to accept the petitioners' physical application due to inability to access the online portal, investigate why the Khata number was inaccessible, and issue a decision within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Tahsildar to consider the physical application, investigate the Khata accessibility issue, and decide within six weeks.

KeshaboinaShivaiah Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO.14049 OF 2019

¶3

Date: 30.10.2019

¶4

Between:

¶5

Keshaboina Shivaiah S/o.K.Mallaiah, Aged about 70 yrs, Occu : Agriculture, R/o.2-48, Ananthasagar Village, Chinnakodur Mandal, Siddipet District & another

¶6

…..Petitioners

¶7

And

¶8

The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.

¶9

…..Respondents

¶10

The Court made the following:

¶11

¶12

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.14049 OF 2019

¶13

ORDER:

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents.

¶15

On 19.06.2019 a representation in physical form was made to the Tahsildar, by the petitioners requesting to mutate their names on land to an extent of Ac.5-07 guntas in Sy.No.434/aa, Ac.0-15 guntas in Sy.No.42/16, Ac.0-04 guntas in Sy.No.102/vu, Ac.0-04 guntas in Sy.No.102/ee, Ac.0-04 guntas in Sy.No.102/e and Ac.0-4 guntas in Sy.No.102/aa situated at Ananthasagar Village, Chinnakodur Mandal, Siddipet District in the place of Mallavva who is the mother of petitioners. Since Mallavva died, petitioners requested to mutate their names. Normally, as per the procedure prescribed by the Government, a person requesting to mutate his name has to apply in prescribed proforma through online web portal and no application is accepted in physical form.

¶16

However, in paragraph No.6 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition it is asserted that though Khata No.198 stands in the name of their mother, they could not make application through Mee-seva as the said Khata number was not opening and therefore, application was made in physical form. 4. In view there of the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Tahsildar-4^th respondent to consider the application made by the petitioners in physical form on 19.06.2019 without insisting for submission of application through online web portal, subject of course collection of any fee as required and

¶17

¶18

consider why Khata No.198 is not opening in Mee-seva Centre and if by mistake it is not opening, the application shall be processed in accordance with the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 regarding their request for mutation and consequential steps. On verification of online record if it is found that Khata No.198 is now opening and showing the name, petitioners be advised to make application in online web portal. A decision shall be taken and communicated to the petitioners within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶19

___________________
P.NAVEEN RAO, J
30 th October, 2019
Rds

KeshaboinaShivaiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

KeshaboinaShivaiah 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr.Thota Srihari Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Thimmappa Kamble Prathap Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Anugu Chinna Reddy Vs The Govt. of Telangana

Pandi Krishnaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Macherla Chinna Venkataiah and 3 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 8 Others

Bairoju Chilukamma Vs State Govt. of Telangana and 3 Others