Disposed

Samineni Swarajyam, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Dec 2022WP/32685/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of this writ petition regarding issuance of pattadar passbooks without deciding merits. Petitioners were permitted to submit an online application via the Dharani portal within three weeks. Respondents directed to consider the application within eight weeks after proper notice to interested parties under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2020.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioners to submit online application via Dharani portal within 3 weeks; respondents Nos. 2 and 4 to consider and pass orders within 8 weeks after giving notice to interested parties.

Samineni Swarajyam, Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[³²⁵⁵ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY. THE^{FIRSTDAYOF DECEMBER}

¶4

TWO^{THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENISUDHEER KUMAR}

¶7

WRIT PETITION^N : 3268 oF 2017

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 Samineni Swaraivam'^{Wo. Late PedaVenkaiah} -A99^{60 years' R/o} ' F;il;;i;;rJr.l'vrirZ6e, inintnakani Mandal, Khammam Diskict. 42 years,^R/o

¶10

2 Samineni Kannaiah,^{Sio. Late PedaVenkaiah Age} F;iil;;i;;r,i;;iliige,'^{cnintnaxaniMandal, Khammam District}

¶11

3 Samineni Naoeswara Rao,^{S/o.Late Peda VenkaiahAge} 40 years, R/o. F;il;;i;pr,ir-riltrg",^{cnintnrtrni Mandal' Khammam District} 37 years,^R/o.

¶12

4 Samineni Ravi^{Kumar, S/o.Late Peda Venkaiah'Age} Flii-illip.ir^{ritlage, Chinthakani Mandal, Khammam District}

¶13

...PETITIONERS

¶14

AND

¶15

The State^{of Telangana,Rep'by the Principal} ,secretary^{to Government'} R"renre Department^{Secretarlat. Hyderabad'}

¶16

The District^{Collector, Khammam District at Khammam'} 3. The Revenue^{DivisionalOfficer, Khammam, Khammam District'} 4. The Tahasildar,^{Chintakani Mandal, Khammam D'strict} 5 Vallamkonda^{Mallaiah, S/o- Late Ramulu, Age 50 years R/o'Patharlapadu} - ,ilis", Cnintnakani Mandal Khammam District 6.VallamkondaVenkati,s/o.LateRamulu,Age4Syears,R/o'Pathar|apadu - ,ittig", Chinthakani Mandal, Khammam District' T.VallamkondaYesu'S/o.LateRamulu'Age45years,R/o'Pathar|apadu' uif^f rg", bhinthakani^{Mandal, Khammam District'}

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under^{Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court maybe} pleased to issue^{writ or direction particularly in the nature of mandamus or any} other appropriate writ'

¶19

A). To declare the inaction of^{the 4th respondent in not consideringthe} representation daled 27.8.2017^{submittedby the1St petitionerfor issuanceof} pattdhar pass books and title deeds^{over an extent of Ac 8'06 guntasin} Sy.No.50/100 situated at^{Nagulavancha revenuevillage of chintakaniMandal,} Khammam District as^{rllegal, void, arbitraryand violating the provisionsof the} A.P.Rights and Land in^{Pattadhar PassBooksAct,1971.}

¶20

B). Consequently to direct^{the 4th respondentto issuepattadhar pass books and} title deeds tn favour^{of the petitioners over an extent of Ac.8 06 guntas in} sy.No.50i1o0 situated^{at Nagulavancha revenuevillage of chintakaniMandal.} Khammam District

¶21

t.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP.^{NO: 40645oF20171}

¶22

Petition under Section 151^{CPCprayingthat in the circumstances stated} in the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition, the HighCourt may be pleased to} direct the 4th respondent to^{consider the representationdated28.7 '2O17} submatted by the^{1st petitionerfor issuanceof pattadharpass booksand title} deeds over an extent of^{Ac.8.06guntas in Sy.No.50/100situatedat} Nagulavancha revenue^{village of Chintakani Mandal, Khammam District'}

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioners:^{SRI V.R. AVULA}

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE}

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos 5 to 7: NONE APPEARED}

¶26

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶27

¶28

j i i

¶29

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.32685 of 2Ot7

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

Heard Sri V.R.Avula, learned counsei for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶32

The case of the petitioners is that one Samineni Pedavenkaiah, husband of the 1"t petitioner purchased agricultural land admeasuring Ac.5-07 guntas in Survey No.50/ 1O0 situated at Nagulavancha Revenue Village of Chintakani Mandal, Khammam District from one Vellamkonda Ramulu, who is father of respondent Nos.5 to 7 herein under an agreement of sale, dated 15.06. 196O and came into possession of the said extent of land. It is further case of the petitioncrs that the husband of the 1st petitioner after purchasing the said extent of land having found that there is an additional extenl of Ac.2-39 guntas over and above Ac.5-O7 guntas covered by agreement of sale and hence, he entered into another agreement of sa1e, dated 15.06.1961-for the:said.excess extent of Ac.2-39 guntas. 'fhus, the husband of 1"t petitioner claims to have come into possession of total extent of Ac.g-06 guntas. It is also the case of the petitioners that the revenue authorities after taking

¶33

¶34

note of the possession of the husband^of the^{1"t petitionerover} an extent of Ac.B-06 guntas in Survey^{No.50/10O,issued} pattadar passbook and title deed in his name. After demise^of the husband of the 1"t petitioner on 01.04.2016,^petitioner Nos.1 to 4 herein, being wife and sons, claim to have^succeeded to the said extent of land. It^{is furtherstated that after demise} of husband og 1st^{petitioner, petitionersgot land in their} possession surveyed in order to resolve the dispute^with respondent Nos.S to 7 and came to know that^{they are in} possession of an extent ol Ac.7'2O^guntas and an^{extentof Ac.0-} 26 guntas is found to have been^{occupiedby the road and} canal. Under those circumstances,^{the petitionersstated to have} approached respondentNo .4 on^{28.07.2O17bringingto his} notice about the true facts to^{issue pattadarpassbook in the} names of the petitioners in respect^{of the said extent of 1and, by} submitting an application in^Form 6-A.^{However,the said} application is not considered^{by the respondentsandhence,} petitioners approached this^{Court by filing this writ petition.}

¶35

Learned Assistant Gov"*-"rri^{Pleaderfor Revenue} app.earing for respondent^{Nos.l to 4submittedthat after} introduction of Dharani^{portal and enactmentof Telangana} Rights in Land and^{PattadarPassbooks Act, 2020, itis}

¶36

obligatory on the part of the petitioners to submit an online application se eking mutation and issuance of pattadar passbook etc., and it is only on submission of online application on Dharani portal under appropriate module, the claim the petitioners can be considered by the respondents. It is further submitted that, in case if the petitioners submits any such online application, the respondents would consider the same in accordance il,ith law.

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts and

¶38

circumstances of the case and the submissions made on either side and also long lapse of time since the date of demise of husband of 1st petitioner, the Writ Petition is disposed of, without going into the merits of the case, permitting the petitioners to submit an application on oniine Dharani portal under appropriate module in respect of the land situated in Survey No.50/ 1O0 admeasuring Ac.7-20'guntas, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on submission of such online appiication, respondents Nos.2 and 4 are directed to consider the same, in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of eight weeks from the date of submission of online application by the petitioners.

¶39

¶40

It is further directed that respondent Nos.2 and 4 while considering the online application submitted by the petitioners, shall put all persons interested on notice including respondent Nos.5 to 7 herein and then pass appropriate orders, as directed above. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶41

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closcd.

¶42

SD/- M. MANJULA DEPUTY-REGISTRAR //TRUE^COPY// sEciriffi oFFrcER

¶43

To, 1. Princtpal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department' Secretariat' The State of^{Telangana.HYderabad.} Z. inJ Oistrict^{Co"llector, khammamDistrictat Khammam'} 5. ii"i" n"r"nr" -Divisional officer, Khammam, Khammam District'

¶44

i. ine rinasitOar,^{Chintakanifvlandal,Khammam District'}

¶45

One CC to^{SRIV R AVULAAdvocate IOPUCI} 6. i;; ac;i"^{Gp ion nEvrruuE(TG), High cburt for the state of Telangana} tourl

¶46

Two CD Copies SK G.JP

-f

HIGH COURT

DATED:01^11212022

ORDER

WP.No.32685 o12017

DISPOSING OF^{THE WRIT PETITION} WITH OUT COSTS

¶53

ij r-.{
I I JIr'l 2il73
).
'.;
i

¶54

¶55

4 I lL)

Samineni Swarajyam, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samineni Swarajyam, 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

Kaki Narayana Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Kunchala Gattamma Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

M/s. Ramky Integrated Township Limited and 2 others Vs The Sub-Registrar and 4 others

Mrs. Arifa Begum Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

Sri Vivekananda Desai Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Vivekananda Desai and 6 others Vs The State of Telangana