Disposed

Smt.Siriga Satya Bai v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Dec 2023WP/34403/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana entertained a writ petition challenging the inaction of the Revenue Divisional Officer in registering and disposing of an application for an Occupancy Right Certificate under the Telangana Abolition of Inams Act. The Court dispensed with notice to one respondent and directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to register the application, conduct an enquiry with proper notic

What did the court decide?

Directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to register the application, issue notice, conduct enquiry, and pass orders within three months.

Smt.Siriga Satya Bai Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

I3183I

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:34403 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Siriga Satya Bai, Wo. Late Raja Chary, Age 85 years, OccHouse Wife, R/o.H.No.1-'142, Parpelly Village of Laxmanchanda Mandal, Dist.Nirmal, presently residing at H.No.1-2-28lfu1, Vidya Nagar, Near PRTU Bhavan, Nirmal, Dist. Nirmal.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

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

¶12

2 The District Collector, Nirmal, Dist.Nirmal.

¶13

3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal, Dist. Nirmal

¶14

4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Laxmanchanda Mandal, Dist. Mancherial.

¶15

5 Deshaboyi Thakkanna, S/o.Rajanna, Age Major, Occ- Not Known, R/o.Madhapur Village of Soari Mandal, Dist. Nirmal.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Qonstitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or orders declaring the inaction of Respondent No.3 in registering the petition filed by the petitioner U/sec. 3 and 4 A.P. (T.A) Abolition of lnams Act, Dated 1211212022 and in disposing the same in accordance with law as being arbitrary, vlndictive, illegal, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and against to the principles of Natural Justice, and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 herein to register the petition filed by the petitioner U/sec.3 and 4 of A.P. (T.A) Abolition of lnams Act and dispose the same in accordance with law.

¶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 direct the Respondent No.3 to register the petition filed by the petitioner U/sec. 3 and 4 A.P. (T.A) Abolition of lnams Act, Dated 12t12t2022 and in disposing the same in accordance with law pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N.SRUSHMAN REDDY

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: AGP FOR REVENUE

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.S: --

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

1 I

¶25

¶26

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.34403 OF 2023

¶28

ORDER:(ORAL)

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and leamed Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents.

¶30

The limited grievance of the petitioner is that his application dated 12.12.2022 filed under Sections 3 and 4 of the A.P.^(TA) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955, befbre respondent No.3 has not been disposed of. It is submitted that the petitioner sought for Occupancy Right Certificate (ORC) tn respect of the land admeasuring Ac.0- l8 guntas tn Survey No.489, situated at Madhapur Vitlage Shivar', Soan Mandal, Nirmal District. 1-hat though the application was filed on 12.12.2022, the matter was not taken up for enquiry^by respondent No.3. However, so far to the knowledge of thc^petitioner, his application has not been registered.

¶31

As innocuous relief is sought by the petitioner, notice to respondent No.5 is dispensed with. Respondent No.4 is directed^to register the petition/application filed by the petitioner dated^12.12.2022 and conduct enquiry, by issuing notice to the^{petitionerand respondent}

¶32

¶33

¶34

No.5 and by giving opportunity of hearing to them, and pass orders in

¶35

accordance with law, within a period of three (3) months from the date

¶36

of receipt of copy of this order.

¶37

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no

¶38

order as to costs

¶39

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending

¶40

in the writ petition stand closed

¶41

sD/- A. PRATHIISIA I AsslsTANr^REGIS{RAR I

To,

//TRUE^COPY//

SECTIO]TOFFICER

'1. The Principal Secretary,^{RevenueDepartment' Secretariat' Hyderabad' State} of Telangana

¶46

The Diskict^{Collector' Nirmal, Dist'Nirmal'}

¶47

¶48

The Revenue^{Divisional Officer, Nirmal'Dist Nirmal}

¶49

¶50

The Mandal^{Revenue Officer, LaxmanchandaMandal' Dist' Mancherial'}

¶51

¶52

One CC^{to SRI N.SRUSHMAN REDDY' Advocate [OPUC]}

¶53

¶54

6 Two CCs to^{GP FOR REVENUE' High Court for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶55

Two CD^CoPies

BSR

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2111212023

ORDER

WP.No.34403 of 2023

SrA16
1
k
o-) Z
0 B jAl{ 2[24 t:)
\J
-:'
* *-
DEspniCir.(ct ,/./.

¶62

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,

¶63

WITHOUT COSTS

¶64

\o
0o
\ *^
{)

Smt.Siriga Satya Bai v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Siriga Satya Bai 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

Mr. Vankayyala Sailu Vs State of Telangana

Arepally Durgamma Vs The State of Telangana

Shree Manjunatha Constructions Vs The State of Telangana

Thammala Srinivas Vs Kalvakuntla Chandrashekar Rao

Sri. Samudrala Jagathaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Bhavanasi Jaya Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana