Disposed

Jogula Sammaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Apr 2023WP/2828/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged a notice issued by the Additional Collector regarding mutation of a name in revenue records as illegal and arbitrary. The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to appear before the Additional Collector with explanations and documents as required.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to appear before Additional Collector with explanations and documents.

Jogula Sammaiah Vs The State of Telangana — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

t^316E I

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 2828 oF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Jog-ula Sammaiah, S/o. Banaiah, Age. 52 Years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H.No. 5-1Bl , Bhupalapally Village and Mandal, Jayashankar-Bh-upalapally District.

¶10

AND

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat. Hvderabad.

¶13

2 The District Collector, Jaya-shankar-Bhupalapally District, Bhupalapally. 3 The Additional Collector, (Locat Bodies), Jay.ashankar-Bhupalbpaliy District, Bhupalapally.

¶14

4 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhupalapally Division, JayashankarBhupalapally District.

¶15

5 The Tahsildar, Bhupalapally Mandal, Jayashnakar-Bhupalapalty District.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the 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 parlicularly, one in the natuie of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No. 3 in issuing the Notice in Rc.No. AC/01/2O23, dated 1910112023, in respect of the mutation of petitioner's name in the Revenue records in respect of the agricultural land in Sy. 325lAlA, admeasuring Ac. 2-10 Gts., situated at Bhupalapally Village and Mandal, Jayashankar-Bhupalapally District, stating that the case in RC.No. FlO11l2O17 before the 4th respondent -RDO, Bhupalapalli, is pending, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and against the principles of natural justice, ind consequently set aside the same

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶19

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 suspend the Notice in Rc.No. AClO1l2023, dated 1910112023 issued by the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. T. RAMCHANDER RAO

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: SRl. J. AMRUTHA RAO, cp FOR REVENUE

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

THE HC NOURAI]LE SRI JUSTICE K.LAK|JIIMAN

¶23

AIRIT I'ETITION No.2828 OF 2023

¶24

ORDER

¶25

lleartl S i f.Ranrachander Rao, learned courst'l apLrearing

¶26

for thc pt'trtio rc'r ancl Sri J.Amrutha Rao, lettn-rccl^(lovemnrent Plcatlt:r lor I t'r,enue appearing for responclr:nt i\o.;.1 to 5 Perusetl tlrr' nr rterial available on record.

¶27

'[lris u'ri pc.titior.r is filecl seeking to c]c,clarc tlrr' ,rction of resl.rrrnclc,nl N ,..i ir-r issuing the Notice in RL:.No.r,] / )l/2023, clatctl l9.t)l .20 13, in r(,spcct of the mutation of th: pctitioncr's rlanr(' in thc Rr venuc l'ccords in respect of thl. agricLrltrrral I.'rnt1 acinrcasurir-r1; tr.2-10 gts in Survey No.325/A/:r sitrratec{ at Bhtr1.ral2p.l111, /illage and Mandal, ]ayashankar- Slrupalapallr. District, as il el al and arbitrary.

¶28

[n thc s ri,1 noticc, there is referenco rvith regartl to grievance rcc€ r,ccl b1. tlte 3.d respondent clatecl 17 A L.2(123 Thert'forc, th s Court ciirccted the learnt:tI A.ssistar-rt Govt'rutlt nt P .,aclr:r for Revenue to produce c()[). ,)I i.hc stric] lettcr'. A pr:rr s,tl oI tht saic-l letter woulc] rr:r,t,,l that ()r1c

¶29

¶30

Mr.Syed Khaleel submitted the said letter to the 3d responclent making certain allegations against the MRO with regard to change of Door number and to conduct enquiry. Respondent No.3 has issued notice dated 19.01.2023 to the petitioner with a request to appear/attend before the Additional Collector (LB), Jayashankar^{Bhupalapally in the chambers} on^27.01.2023 for enquiry along with supporting documents, if any, relating to the case without fail. A copy of the said greivance letter datcd 77.07.2023 submitted by Mr. Syed Khaleel to respondent No.3 is furnished on the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶31

In view of the same, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to appear before the 3.d respondent in compliance with the notice dated 79.07.2023 and subn'rit explanation and documents as required by him and on receipt of same, respondent No.3 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶32

¶33

As a :;et uel, the miscellaneous petitiorrs, if any, pending

¶34

in the Writ i)e ition shall stand closed. No order a:i to ccsts.

¶35

SD/. MOHD. SAN/\UI..LAH ANSARI ASSTST/\N't' EEGtSTRAR

¶36

i/TRUE COPY//

¶37

I;ECTION OFFICER

¶38

To, 1. ThePrincipal lie :retary, Revenue Department, Secretariat T.S., Hyderabad 2. The District Coll :ctor, Jayashankar-Bhupalapally District, tlhupa lapally. 3. The Additional⁽ ollerlor, (Local Bodies), Jayashankar-Bhr pitlap ally District, Bhupalapally.

¶39

The Revenue D risional Officer, Bhupalapally Division, Ja1'ar;hankarBhupalapally Di trict.

¶40

The Tahsildar, E hupalapally [,4andal, Jayashnakar-Bhupal rpally District. 6. Two CCs to GF FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State o'Telangana, at Hyderabad [C)U

¶41

One CC to SRI T l RATMCHANDER RAO, Advocate [OPUC]

8- Two CD cr:^pir:s

. Bl,4

,b*c.rp

HIGH COURI

KL J

DATED:04104t2023

ORDER

WP.No.2828 ,rf 2023

/,i
I il ri A'i ?i?l

DISPOSING 0F THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT C( )STS

¶52

..f
(<br>1

Jogula Sammaiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jogula Sammaiah 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Scr Nirman Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and 4 others

Sabavath Laxman Vs The State of Telangana

Sriharsha Majety Vs Union Bank of India

Goli Yadagiri Vs The State of Telangana

Vandanampu Yadaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Makka Mallesham Vs The State of Telangana and 8 others