Disposed

Maskuri Narsimlu v. The Union of India

Telangana HC31 Jul 2023WP/20362/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court directed the Secunderabad Cantonment Board to consider the petitioner's application for mutation of his name in revenue records regarding a residential plot within two weeks, holding no costs.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's application for mutation of name in revenue records and pass appropriate orders within two weeks.

Maskuri Narsimlu Vs The Union of India — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

l32s2l

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 20362 OF 2023

¶7

Between

¶8

Maskuri Narsimlu, S/o M. Ralaiah Aged about 30^years, Occ Business, Fl/o H. No. 2- 2211 , Chinnagundavally, Siddipet, Telangana State

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Union of lndia, Rep. by its Under Secretary,^{Cantonment Boards Central} $ecretariat,^{New Delhi}

¶12

The Secunderabad Cantonment Board,^{Rep. by its chief Executive Officer,} City Civil court Complex, Secunderabad.

¶13

..RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith, the HighCourt may be pleased} to issue a writ order or direction^{more particularly one in the nature of} WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the^{Respondent No. 2 in not} mutating the name of the^{petitioner in the 2nd respondent revenue recordsin} respect of the residential house on^plot bearing^{Nos. 88/1 and 91/1} ,^admeasuring 86 Sq. Yards or 71. 89 Sq. IVleters^{(out of 250 Sq. yards} )^{consisting of Ground} Floor having a total built up area of 140 Sq.^{Ft of ACC Sheets in Sy. Nos.45,} 4611 & 47, situated at Koteshwar Rao colony,^{Kakaguda village, under the limitsof} the Secunderabad Cantonment,^{Telangana state is illegal, arbitrary contraryto law} and violation of Article. 300A of the Constitution^{of lndia and consequently direct} the respondents to mutate the^name of^{the petitionerin the 2nd respondent} revenue records by issuing the^pass books^{in respectof the above statedsupra} House.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶16

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 2nd respondent to mutate the name of the petitioner in the 2nd respondent revenue records in respect of the residential house on plot bearing Nos. 88/1 and 9111 , admeasuring 86 Sq. Yards or 71. 89 Sq. l,ilaters (out of 250 Sq. yards ) consisting of Ground Floor having a total built up area of 140 Sq. Feet of ACC Sheets in Sy. Nos. 45, 4611 & 47, situated at Koteshwar Rao colony, Kakaguda village, under the limits of the Secunderabad Cantonment, Telangana state by issuing pass books pending disposal of the Writ petition.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. N SREENIVASA YADAV

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶19

Dy. SOLICIToR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI M K R KOTESWAR RAO SC FOR : SECUNDERABAD CANTONMENT BOARD

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SI,,REPALLI^NANDA

¶23

WRIT PETITIO NN o.20362 0^{F 2023}

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Heard Mr.M,Narsimlu, learned counsel for^the petitioner, Mr,Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent^{No.1and Mr.K.R.} Koteswar Rao, tearned Standing Counsel^appearingfor respondent No.2.

¶26

2. The petitioner has approached this Court, seeking the following relief:

¶27

"...to issue a rryrit order or directiorr more^particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF^{MANDAMUSdeclaring} the action of the Respondent No.2 in not^mutating the name of the^petitioner in the^{2nd respondent} revenue records in respect of the residential^house on plot bearirrg Ncrs. BB/1 and 9l/L,^admeasuring 86 Sq. Yards or 71.89 Sq. Nleters^(out of^250Sq. yards) consisting of Ground Floor having a total built up area of 140 Sq. Ft of^{ACC Sheets in Sy.Nos.} 45, 46/l and 47, situated at Koteshwar^{Rao colony,} Kakaguda village, under the limits of^the Secunderabad Cantonment, Telangana state^is illegal, arbit rary contrary to law and violation of Article 30CA of the Constitution of India^and consequently direct the respondents to mutate the name of thrr^petitioner in the 2nd respondent

¶28

¶29

¶30

revenue records by issuing the pass books in respect of the above stated supra House and pass..."

¶31

The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent failed to mutate the name of the petitioner in the 2nd respondent revenue records in respect of the residential house plot bearing Nos.B8/1 and 9I/1, admeasuring g6 square yarcls or 71.g9 square tneters out of 250 square yards consisting of Ground floor, having a total built up area of 140 square feet of ACC sheets in survey Nos.45, 46/r and 47, situatec, at Koteshwar Rao colony, Kakaguda viilage, under the rinrits of Secunderabad Cantonment, Telangana State by issuing passbooks.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also filed material documents i.e., (i) Challan/Bill dated 13.02.2023, which clearly indicates the address of the petitioner as .,88/1 AND 91l1/p KAKAGUDA vILLAGE KAKAGUDA others,,, and (ii) the property tax bill payment cash receipt which also indicates the plot number as..8g/1&91 /L/p,,.

¶33

Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the material documents filed in support thereof, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to

¶34

consider the application of the petitioner dated

¶35

13.02.2023 in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders within a period of two (O2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no

¶36

order as to costs.

¶37

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶38

SD/. N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //rRUE CoPY// Sf6r\dz1 SECTION-t,FFICER

¶39

To,

¶40

'1 . The Under Secretary, Union of lndia, Cantonment Boards Central Secretariat, New Delhi

¶41

The chief Executive Officer, Secunderabad Cantonment Board, City Civil court Complex, Secunderabad

¶42

One CC to SRl. N SREENIVASA YADAV, Advocate.[OPUC]

¶43

One CC to SRl. GADI PRAVEEN KUIVAR, Dy. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF rNDrA.[OPUC]

¶44

One CC to SRI t/ K R KOTESWAR RAO SC FOR SECUNDERABAD cANTONTMENT BOARD.[OPUC]

¶45

Two CD Copies

GJP

Pcnq.

HIGH COURT

DATED:31 10712023

tIE S TA rti
{
q
o 2 g ME 2m 7z
* *a,t
t'.:

¶52

ORDER

¶53

WP.No.20362 of 2023

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶55

pl.(, \b<sup>qlr 3

Maskuri Narsimlu v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maskuri Narsimlu v. The Union of India

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

Smt. S.R.Venkateswaramma Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Mahmood Hussaini Baghdadi @ Saadat Peer Baghdadi Vs The State of Telangana

T. Venkateshwar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Anjana Sravani Enterprises Vs Union of India

Kollipara Aravinda Babu, Vs The Union of India

G. Satyanarayana Vs Life Insurance Corporation of India