Disposed

Erri Buchamma v. State of telangana

Telangana HC17 Apr 2023WP/10356/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the inaction of the District Collector in considering an online dharani application for mutation and issuance of an e-pattadar passbook for land in Jangaon District, without costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of by directing the 2nd respondent to consider the application or assign reasons for inaction within eight weeks.

Erri Buchamma Vs State of telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 103sG OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Erri Euchamma, Wo: Bhaskar reddy, aged about 46 years, Occ. house wife R/o Namiligonda village, Station Ghanpur [\4andal Jang-aon District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

State of telangana, rep by its Principal secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District collector, Jangaon district

¶13

The Tahasildar, Station Ghanpur Mandal Jangaon District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitulion of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent No. 2 to in considering the dharani application vide No. 2300009937 dated 17.2.2023 for issuance of pass books fdr the lands in survey No. 556/F extent ac 0.1 6 gts and in survey No. 565/H extent ac 0.06 gts situated at Namiligonda village, Station Ghanpur mandal, Jangaon Distric as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the respondent No. 2 to consider the dharani application No. 2300009937 dated 17.2.2023.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶17

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 direct the rcspondent No 2 to consider the dharani application vide No. 2300009937

¶18

dated 17.2.2023 f<'| issuance of pass books for the lanrJs ir.r su.vey No. 556/F extent ac 0.1rj gts and in survey No. 565/H extenr ac t) 06 Jts situated at Namiligonda v llagr;. Station Ghanpur mandal, Jangaon E,ist ic t ponding disposal of the above w'it pet lon

¶19

Counsel for the Pet :ioner: SRl. ERRI RAVINDER REDDy

¶20

Counsel for the Res :ondents: SRl. J. AMRUTH RAO, ASSISTt\N]'Gp FOR REVENUE

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

I I

¶23

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶24

WRIT PETITION No.10356 OF- 2023

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Heard Sri E.Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri J.Amruth Rao, leamed Assistant Govemment Pleader lor Revenue. Perused the record

¶27

The petitionel herein is claiming that she is the absolutc orvner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.0.l6guntas ir, Sy.No.556/F and Ac.0.06guntas in Sy.No.565/fl along with other survey numbers situated at Namiligonda Village, Station Ghanpur Mandal, Jangaon District on the strength of registered sale deed vide Document No.2986 of 2020 dated 19.06.2020 and she has also filed copies of the said sale deed, latest pattadar passbook and title deed of her vendor and copies ol pahanies. She has made online application bearing Ref.No.2300009937, dated 17.02.2023 before 2nd respondent with a request to mutate her name and issue e-pattadar passbook. Despite receiving and acknowledging the same, 2'd respondent did not act upon. Therefore, the present writ petition.

¶28

Whereas, learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for Revenue, would

¶29

submit that 2"d respondent will consider the said online application in accordance with law.

¶30

¶31

IS .1 In r c* of lhc rlloresaid^{subtnissitln:r,this} 'n'rit l)ctilit)11 disposcil trl irecring^l' rcspondent to cottsirler the saicl orllirre appIrcat un t de Rel.No^{Ii000099i7, datcd 17.()..102.iatrclpass} apprrrplirrte o d:r's in^{accotditnce rvith law by puttirrr-:tl1() petitioner} and all rrllec t d parties^{on Irotice and alfordingthetr an opportLrnity.} If. 2''I rc sp<,r Cent is^{not inclined to consider tlre said application} subrn ittcd hr t(: petitioncl^{. Iie shall assign reasc'ns anl ras; ortlctand} cot]l n I rut ie ir Lr: hl sarnc^{to the} ltctitioner.^{2"'l I cspon,lert :;ha I cotrrplctc} the saicl -'r r.r c st^r,, ithirr^{ciqht(tt) weeksft'otr the tlat: Irl receiptol- a} copy ol'this or lc'r.

¶32

Asasc ruel. thc^{ttrisccllancouspetitions, f zny} Ienrling^{in the} Writ Petitirur s rall stand^{c losed.}

¶33

SD/.N.CHAiIDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// secthdfoprrcen

¶34

One CC to Sr Erri Ravinder Reddy,^Advocate [O-PUC] Two CCs; io^-C Pfor Revenue, High Court for the^State ol T'-'langana. [OUT] Two CD Copie ; TJ SB

&&*

HIGH COUR T

DATED:1710,t12023

ORDER

R<br>.rY
a1
t-<br>.-...--

¶41

WP.No.10356 of 2023

¶42

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CO:;TS.

¶43

bP. "1 tu

Erri Buchamma v. State of telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Erri Buchamma v. 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

Pothula Kamala Devi and another Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Dhairya Omprakash Jhunjhun Wal Vs Union of India

Sri Satya Harischandra Sivaseva Samithi Vs The State of Telangana

V.Prakash Goud Vs State of telangana

Dr. Devi Sushma and Nallakukkala Vs The State of Telangana

Dr P Vanaja Vs Union of India