Disposed

M/s. Vijayanagar Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. v. The Principal Secretary

Telangana HC28 Mar 2022WP/12607/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Privately owned real estate company filed a writ petition challenging the inaction of Revenue authorities in mutating its name and issuing a pattadar pass book for agricultural land purchased via registered sale deeds, invoking Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to submit an application through the Dharani portal for mutation and pattadar pass book issuance; the 2nd respondent must conduct an enquiry and pass orders within ten weeks.

M/s. Vijayanagar Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Principal… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

MONDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 12607 OF 2022

¶6

Betwee n:

¶7

Mis. Vijayanagar Real Estate Pfi. Ltd., Rep. by its Director, Jana Venkata Suresh, S/o. Jana Rama Rao, Rlo.B-2-293lB2lA21lA, Road No.2, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-500033.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Telangana, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶11

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, at Lakidi-ka-pool, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Special Tribunal (REVENUE), Cum-Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, At Lakidi-ka-pool, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Joint Sub-Registrar cum Tahsildar, Ir,4aheswaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, T.S.

¶14

..,RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the 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 inaction of the Respondents No.2 and 3 in considering the application d1.25-11-2021 seeking to enter the petitioners name in the pattadar and possessors column by carrying corrections in the revenue record of pahanies rn respecl of the agricultural land admeasuring an extent of Ac. 6-'19 Gts., in Sy. No. 320 and A,c. 5-22 Gts., in Sy. No. 322., Ac.2-39 Gts., in Sy. No. 323, Ac. 13-29 Gts., in Sy. No. 324 and Ac. 1-11 Gts., in Sy. No. 323/Part, situated at Mansanpally (V), Maheswaram (M), Ranga Reddy District., and issue pattadar pass book in favour of the Petitioner as illegal, irregular and against the principles of natural^justice and offends the Art. 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia

¶16

¶17

and consequentially direct the 3rd Respondent to consider the application of the petitioner seeking to enter the Petitioners name in the pattadar and possessors column by carrying corrections in the revenue record of^pahanies in respect of^the above said land an extent of Ac. 6-19 Gts., in Sy. No. 320 and Ac. 5-22 Gts.,ⁱⁿ Sy. No. 322., Ac.2-39 Gts., in Sy. No. 323, Ac. 13-29 Gts., in Sy. No. 324 and Ac. 1-'1 1 Gts., in Sy. No. 323lPar1, situated at Mansanpally^(V), Maheswaram^(M), Ranga Reddy District., and issue^{pattadar pass} book in favour of the Petitioner.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶19

Petition under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to stay all further proceedings including registrations over the agricultural Iand admeasuring an extent of Ac. 6-19 Gts., in Sy. No. 320 and Ac. 5-22 Gts., in Sy. No.322., Ac.2-39 Gts., in Sy. No.323, Ac. 13-29 Gts., in Sy. No.324 and Ac. 1- '1 1 Gts., in Sy. No. 3231Pafi., situated at Mansanpally (V), It/aheswaram (lVl), Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the writ^petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J.THULSIRAM

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{B. VIJAYSENREDDY}

¶24

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.126O7 O? 2022

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the^learned Government Pleader for Respondents

¶28

Petitioner is aggrieved by the action^{of the Respondents 2 and 3} in not considering the application of^{the petitioner firm dated} 25.11.2021 for mutation of his name in the^{revenuerecord in respectof} Iand admeasuring Ac.6- 19^guntas in Sy.No.320^{and Ac,5-22 guntas in} Sy.No.322, Ac.2-39 guntas, in Sy.No.323,^{Ac.13-29guntas in} Sy.No.324 and Ac.1-¹ 1 guntasⁱⁿ Sy.No.323/Part^situatedat Mansanpally village, Maheshwaram mandal,^{Ranga Reddydistrict.}

¶29

Petitioner firm claims to be owner and^{possessor of the above} agricultural lands having^purchased the^{sameunder registered sale} deed bearing document No.21506 of 2006^{dated 27.11.2006and} document No.21507 of 2006 dated 27.11.206.^{Accordingto the} petitioner, their vendor's name was mutated in the^{revenue record and} pahanies vide proceedings No.D/2685 of 2O06 dated^{18.11.2O06. On} introduction of Dharani Portal,^{petitioner requestedthe respondentsto} mutate their names in the revenue^records and^{also for issuance of} pattadar passbooks and title deeds. Since there was no^response, petitioner submitted representation dated 25.11.2O21 to^the2"d respondent- Di strict Collector. However, the^{saidrepresentationll'as} not considered. It is also stated that some third^{parties approached the} Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy East^{Division claiming}

¶30

ownership rights under Section 38-A of the Tenancy Act and the said claim was rejected vide order dated 6.12.2OO4.

¶31

The record discloses that petitioner filed appeal under Section 16 of Act 9 of 2O2O i.e. The Telangana Rights in Land and pattadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O before the 3'd respondent-Special Tribunal on 72.11.2027 and also representation dated 25.I1.2027 to the 2nd respondent- District Collector. The learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the provisions of Act 9 of 2O2O do not contemplate entertaining of appeal and directions be issued to the petitioner to file appropriate application through Dharani Portal and the same will be considered by the 2na respondent.

¶32

In.view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner herein to submit application through Dharani portal for mutation/change of revenue entries/ issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds by paying requisite fee and on receipt of such application, the 2nd respondent sha11 conduct enquiry by issuing notice to a1l the interested persons and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. This exercise sha1l be conducted within a period of ten (10) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

¶34

To,

¶35

ASSTsTAR?trs$liERlil 'frRUE^coPY// sEc{ffii oFFtcER 1 The Principal Secretary,^{Revenue Department, Governmentof Telangana'} Secretariai Buildings,^Hyderabad 2 i#Di;irA c"ireCiol,^{n'rngJ C"ddv District,At Lakidi-ka-pool' Hvderabad'}

¶36

3 TheSoecialTribunal(REVENUE),Cum-JointCollector'RangaReddyDistrict' At Lakidi-ka-Pool.^HYderabad.

¶37

r&-*.

¶38

|[1ri"?:T:ub-Resistrar^{cum Tahsitdar,r,4aheswaramtVandat,Ransa Reddy}

¶39

1. One CC to SRI J.THULStRA[M, Advocate IOPUCI 6. Two CCs to the Gp for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana. louTl

¶40

1. Two C.D. Copies. B. One Spare Copy. IURC

uve5\r

HIGH^COURT

DA'1ED.,2810312022

ORDER

-t '.1'; :l.r1,i€
oIaa'
r.) al(:
v$il
.1f.,
*\ ,/

¶46

WP.No.12607^{ot 2022}

¶47

DISPOSING^{OF THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS

¶48

M/s. Vijayanagar Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. v. The Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Vijayanagar Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. v. The Principal Secretary

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

U. Janamma Vs THThe State of Telangana

Mohammed Ghouse Vs The State of Telangana

Mrs. Goulikar Aruna Vs The State of Telangana

md. Yaseen Vs Tahasildar

D .Rameshchandra Gupta Vs The State of Telangana

Adike Arjun Kumar Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others