Disposed

Pannala Sesha Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Dec 2022WP/6818/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition challenging revision orders against petitioners' right to retain land as pattedars. Due to the repeal of the old Act and enactment of the 2020 Act, the court directed transmission of records to the District Collector for fresh enquiry under new Circular No. 1 of 2021.

What did the court decide?

Dist. Collector directed to take up case under Circular No. 1 of 2021, conduct enquiry and pass orders within three months; matter remitted to new framework.

Pannala Sesha Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[³²⁵⁶ ]

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 6818 OF 2019

¶7

Between:

¶8

'1 . Pannala Sesha Reddy, S/o Narasimha Reddy @ Narsaiah, aged 70 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nalgonda District.

¶9

Pannala Janardhan Reddy, S/o.Narasimha Reddy @ Narsaiah, aged 65 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nalgonda District.

¶10

Smt. Pannala Parvathamma, Wo late Linga Reddy aged. 55^years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nalgonda District.

¶11

Pannala Saidireddy, S/o Late Linga Reddy, aged. 38 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nalgonda District.

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Joint Collector, Nalgonda District

¶16

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda

¶17

The Tahasildar, Nakrekal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶18

Pannala Linga Reddy, S/o Veera Reddy 66 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nalgonda District

¶19

Pannala Malla Redd S/o Veera Reddy aged. 61 years, Occ. Agriculture R/o Nakrekal (V) and (M ),^v Nalgonda District

¶20

...RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition under Article 226 ol 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 directlon more particularly one in the nature of Writ of certiorari and call for the records and set aside the order dated 01-032019 made in Revision Case No. F21166712013, on the file of 2nd respondent Joint Collector, Nalgonda district, as without^{jurisdiction,} arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Telangana State Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Books Act, 1971 consequently direct the respondents to continue name of the^{petitioners in} the revenue records as^pattedars and^possessors in respect of the land

¶22

.:---<-:+-rtt-b

¶23

admeasuring Ac.4-20 gt. in Sy.No. 197 of Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nalgonda district.

¶24

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶25

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings by suspending the operation of order dated 01-03-2019 made in Case No.F2l166712013, pending disposal of Writ^petition.

¶26

lA NO: 2 OF 2019

¶27

Between:

¶28

Pannala Linga Reddy, S/o Veera Reddy Aged 66 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rt/o Nakrekal (V) and (tt/), Nalgonda District

¶29

...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT No.5

¶30

AND

¶31

1 Pannala Sesha Reddy, S/o Narasimha Reddy @ Narsaiah, aged 70 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Naigo-nda. district.^"

¶32

2 Pannala Janardhan Rp4dy, S/o.Narasimha Reddy @ Narsaiah, aged 65 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nllgdnda district.

¶33

3 Smt. Pannala Parvathamma, Wo late Linga Reddy aged. 55 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nalgonda distriCt.

¶34

4 i?nlglg^{Saidireddy,S/o LateLinga Reddy,aged. 38 years, Occ. Agriculture,} Rl/o Nakrekal (V) and (M), Nalgonda district.

¶35

The State of Telangana, r-ep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶36

6 The Joint Collector, Nalgonda District

¶37

7 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda

¶38

The Tahasildar, Nakrekal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶39

Pannala Malla Reddy, S/o Veera Reddy aged. 61 years, Occ. Agriculture Rt/o Nakrekal (V) and (lt/), Nalgonda District.

¶40

...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

¶41

Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dt: 1-04-2019 passed in l.A. No. 1 of 201 g and to dismiss the above writ petition.

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI LOKIREV PREETHAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1to4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5&6: SRI KIRAN PALAKURTHI The Court made the following: ORDER

¶43

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶44

WRIT PtrTITION NO.6B1B OF 2019

¶45

ORDER:

¶46

This Writ Petition is hled assailing the order passed by the second respondent in a revision case bearing No.F2/ 1667 l2Ol3 dated O 1.03.20 19 wherein the second respondent while remanding the matter back to the fourth respondent herein issued specific direction to the fourth respondent to restore the patta in the name of one Pannala China Narsaiah, S/o.Lingaiah and to mutate the same in favour of the legai heirs and purchasers of the said Pannala Narsaiah. While giving such a direction, the second respondent aiso directed the fourth respondent to follow the procedure provided under sub-section 3 of Section 5 of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 ("the Act, 1971" for brevity) and to conclude the proceedings within a period of two months. Aggrieved by the said findings/observations made by the second respondent, the petitioners, who are respondents in the revision case, have approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition.

¶47

The said revision case was hled by the respondents 5 and 6 herein aggrieved by an order passed by the third respondent

¶48

\r ,'/ rL

¶49

2 MSK,J w.P.NO.6a18'OF 2019

¶50

in appeal No.B I 1937 120 13 dated 2I .12.2Ot3 wherein the third respondcnt herein remanded the matter back to the lourth respondent with a direction to ascertain the facts together with the relevant records before issuing the pattadar pass books and title deeds in accordance with 1aw.

¶51

A perusal of the orders passed by the second and third respondents dated 01.03.2O19 and 2l.l2.2olg respectively shows that the substance of the said orders is only remanding the matter back to the fourth respondent for considering the rival claims of the petitioners as well as the unofficial respondents. But both the authorities in their orders ha,re made obseruations influencing the independent enqrriry that is required to be conducted by the fourth respondent.

¶52

In the circumstances, this Court is of ttre view that both the orders of the respondents 2 and 3 are not sustainable and the matter is required to be considered afresh by considering the clairns of the petitioners as well as the unoflicial respondents,'ifter affording a reasonable opportunit5z to all the parties concerned. In the normal course, this Court would have remanded the matter back to the fourth respondent for fresh consideration of the claims of the respective parties, but, taking into consideration the repeal of the Act, 1971 and enactment of

¶53

¶54

3 MSK,J W.P.NO.6818 0F 2019

¶55

the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar^{Pass BooksAct,} 2O2O read with Circular No.1 of 2021 dated 15.01.2021 issued by the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, the fourth respondent is directed to forthwith transmit the entire record pertaining to the case on hand to the District Collector, Nalgonda District and the District Collector is further directed to take up the case in terms of Circuiar No. 1 of 2027 dated 15.O1.2O2 I and conduct necessary enquiry and pass appropriate orders, vrithout reference to any of the observations made in the orders dated O1.03.2019 and 21.12.2013 passed by the respondents 2 and 3 respectively after duly affording an opportunit5z to all the parties concerned and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of record from the fourl-h respondent.

¶56

Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶57

There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous

¶58

applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶59

SD/.K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT GISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶60

To,

¶61

SECTION OFFICER

¶62

1 The Principal Secretary., Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, State of I elangana, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶63

The Joint Collector, Nalgonda District

¶64

3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda District. 4 The Tahasildar, Nakrekal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶65

One CC to SRI LOKIREV PREETHAM REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶66

o Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana. touTl

¶67

7 One CC to SRI KIRAN PALAKURTHI Advocate [OPUC]

¶68

8 Two CD Copies

¶69

KKS BB

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2311212022

I I

ORDER

WP.No.6818 of 2019

,,,-4-<br>o':) 2 0 JAil 209 I
t'.
" *l
*-*1

¶79

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (iJ r;-nc U-\ 9^\L a l',-9

Pannala Sesha Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pannala Sesha Reddy 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

Sri Veerannagari Gautham Reddy and 3 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 6 Others

Sri Veerannagari Gautham Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Veerannagari Gautham Reddy and 3 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 6 Others

Gopuraju Ramesh Vs Sri Somesh Kumar , IAS

Madarsa Darul Uloom Jamia Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Yeluvaka Swapna Vs Sri Somesh Kumar, Ias.