Disposed

Rathod Lakshman v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Dec 2023WP/34041/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In the High Court of Telangana, a writ petition was filed seeking a declaration that the inaction of respondents in processing Dharani applications for land record correction and passbook issuance was illegal. The Court directed the relevant officials to process the applications within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directing Respondents No. 2 and 4 to consider Dharani Applications dated 29.09.2023, issue notices to concerned persons, and pass orders on correction of revenue records within two months.

Rathod Lakshman Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ J

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:3,f041 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Rathod Lakshman, S/o. Gardhan, Aged about 34 Years, Occ ; AgricuHure, Rl/o.H.No.6-1 Kondakal Thanda, Shankarpalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy Diskict 50't203.

¶9

Rathod Redya, S/o. Gardhan, Aged about 32 Years, Occ ; Agriculture, R/o.H.No. 6-1 Kondakal Thanda, Shankarpalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy Diskict 501203.

¶10

.....PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

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

¶13

The District Collector. Ranga Reddy, Ranga Reddy District.

¶14

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevalla Revenue Division, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District.

¶15

The Tahsildar, Shankarpalli Mandal Shankdrpalli. Ranga Reddy Dislrict.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fibd therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direc(ion more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 2nd and 4th respondent for non correction of the revenue records by adding the actual extent as per the^proceedings No. C3 /5989 /76 dated 17-06'1978 is illegal, arbitrary, violation of the principbs of natural^justice fundamental rights^guaranteed under the Constitution of lndia, and consequently direct the respondents No.2 and 4 to consider my representation for adding the total extent of land as^per the proceedings No. C3 /5989 i76 dated 17-06-1978.

¶18

¶19

|.A.NO:1 OF 2023

¶20

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 2"d and 4th respondent to consider my representation dated^.17-10- 2023, 19-08-2023 and dharani apptication dated 29.09.2023 through Dharani Ref No.2300148149, No.2300 148141 for issuing the pass books byadding Ac. 0..10 1/2 guntas in sy.No.381/212 for rhe 1't petitioner and sy No. 3g1l2t1 to the 2nd petitioner to the extent of Ac.0.10 1/2 guntas situated at Kondakal Village shankarpalli Mandal Ranga Reddy District forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI NALLAMASU KRISHNA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents : AGp FOR REVENUE

¶23

The Court made the following ORDER

rtl

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3404 I OF 2023

¶28

ORDER: (ORAL)

¶29

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents in not considering Dharani Application bearing Nos.2300l4g14l and 2300148 149 dared 29.09.2023 submitted by the petitioners for correction of revenue records and for issuance of new pattadar passbooks in their favour by adding Ac.0-10 % Guntas in Survey No.38l/2/l and Ac.0-10 % Guntas in Survey No.3gl/2/2 situated at Kondakal Village, Shankarpalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as per proceedings No.C3l5958/76 dated 17.06.197g as being illegal and arbitrary.

¶30

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and leamed Assistant Government pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents, and perused the material on record.

¶31

It is claimed that the father of the petitioners was originally allotted the land to an extent of Acs.3_35 Guntas in Survey No.38l siruated at Kondakal Village, Shankarpalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, through proceedings No.C3l59g9/76 dated \

)

C,$s&*

17.06.1978 issued by the Tahsildar, Chevella. Subsequently, petitioner Nos.l and 2 became the absolute owners and possessors of the subject land admeasuring Ac.1.27.5 guntas each in Survey No.38l/2/2 and 381/2/l situated at Kondakal Village, Shankarpalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, respectively, having acquired the same from their father. Crievance of the petitioners is that they were issued new pattadar passbooks showing the land to an extent of Acs.l-27 Guntas only instead of Acs.l-37.5 Guntas. They submitted Dharani Application Nos.2300 I 48 I 4 I and 2300 I 48 149 dated 29.09.2023 seeking correction of revenue records and for issuance of new pattadar passbooks by adding Ac.0-10 % Guntas ln Survey No.38l/2i1 and Ac.0-10 % Guntas in Survey No.38l/2/1, but till date, the respondents have not acted upon their applications. As there is inordinate delay on the part of respondent authorities in processing the Dharani applications of the petitioners, the petitioners are constrained to approach this Court.

¶36

Leamed Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents has submitted that appropriate action

¶37

¶38

will be taken on Dharani applications submitted by the petitioners,

¶39

in accordance with law

¶40

Recording the aforesaid submission of leamed Assistant

¶41

Government Pleader for Revenue, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos.2 and 4 to consider Dharani Application Nos.2300 I 48 14 land 2300 I 48 I 49 dated 20.09.2023 submitted by the petitioners for correction of revenue records and for issuance of new pattadar passbooks in their favour by adding Ac.0-10 % Guntas in Suwey No.38l/2/l and Ac.0-10 % Guntas in Survey No.38l/2/l situated at Kondakal Village, Shankarpalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as per proceedings No.C3l5958/76 dated 17.06.1978, by issuing notice to all concerned/interested persons, and pass orders, in accordance with law, within a period of two⁽²⁾ months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.

¶42

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications,

¶43

if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed

¶44

SD/.K. SREERAMA^MURTHY ASSISTANT^RFGISTRAR /,rRUE coPY/' "__ SECNONbFFICER

¶45

¶46

to ,. ,n. principal Secretary. Revenue Department, secretariat Buirdings, state of Telanqana at^HYderabad

¶47

1. il;'Di;drcoii"iioi,^{nrns"Reddv,Rans-a ReddvDistrict} i: iil; R;;;L"-oiririonrt^{ijfi["i, c6'"urt6"Revenu6Division, chevella,Ranga} Reddy District.

¶48

¶49

¶50

4 The Tahsildar, Shankarpalli^{Mandal ShankarpalliRanga Reddy District} 5 rwl c-Ci to op roR^{REVENUE,Highcourtfor the State of relanganaat} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶51

6 Ohe CC to Sri Nailamasu^{Krishna,Advocate} [OPUC] 7 Two CD Copies

b.,'z(

I I

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811212023

ORDER

WP.No.34041 ot 2023

1tr € STA}€'
P
1 B JIN 202[ c)
oo)c
* ,zl ',1
DE6pAlC<br>

¶63

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

¶64

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶65

\r-<br>r,
{rr

Rathod Lakshman v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rathod Lakshman 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

Vitta Satyanarayana Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 5 Others

Mandumula Laxmaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Yerram Ramesh Vs NagillaRupus

Smt.B.Kalyani Vs The State of Telangana

Narsolla Balamani Vs the State of Telangana

Sri.Duddukuri Laxmi Narayana Vs The State of Telangana