Disposed

L.Chandra Sekhar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC13 Apr 2023WP/9945/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petitioner sought mutation of land records based on a sale deed due to non-action by revenue authorities. The petition was disposed of by directing the District Collector to consider pending online applications, afford notice to parties, and complete the exercise within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. (District Collector, Medak) to consider pending online applications, provide notice to affected parties, pass reasoned order within eight weeks if claim rejected.

L.Chandra Sekhar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR^THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE^{THIRTEENTH DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND AND^{TWENTY THREE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICEK.LAKSHMAN}

¶6

wRl T PETITION O: 9945 OF 23

¶7

Between:

¶8

L.Chandra Sekhar^{Reddy, S/o.Sri L.Sudhakar Reddy, Age 48 years' Occ;Business'} Rv;.Ft;i N".rral niraddi'iri,ghG,-siru"i-r'roo,^{iawlnar Nasar'Rrc X Road'} Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana,^{Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department'} Secretariat, HYderabad.

¶12

The District Collector,^{MedakDistrict.}

¶13

The Revenue^{Divisional Officer, Toopran,[Vledak District'}

¶14

The Tahsildar,^{Manoharabad Mandal, Medak District'}

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition Under^{Article 226 of the constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavit filedtherewith, the High court may be} pleasedtoissueanappropriateWrit,orderordirectionrnoreparticularlyonein [n"-n"trr" of writ^{of trriandamusdeclaringthe inactionof the respondents No'2 to} 4 herein in mutating^{the petitioner nameln respect of land admeasuring Ac.5- 37} st;.;^{i;sv.N;.irs7rsn,'AA, E, 11et15t2and3, 119t4tAA. 11et17B situatedin} iu"hip"rrv'viriage,^{ManoharabadMandal, Medak Districtas.illegal,arbitrary,} ;;;;;t io the ietfled^{principtes of taw and viotative.of Articte14, 21 and 3004 of} the Constitution^{of lndia and consequentlydirect the respondentshereinto} forthwith mutate^{the name of tne petiiionei in revenue records, Dharani portal} ,nJ ir.r"^{pass book by removing the land from the list of prohibitionin the} interest of^justice.

¶17

r.A.NO :'l^{oF 2023}

¶18

Petition Unler^{S; )ction 151 CPC prayingthat in the circ jrllstzrncesstated} in the affidavit^{filed rn rur'Jon'Ji t# p"iition' [h" Hinn Court nrrvb': pleasedto} ihe narre.'the^petitionerin direct^{the responoents'Jt ii;;'t"ioln*iin} "tate '"n" i lz gts.' in sr Nn 'l 1{ /19A' AA' E' resoect of^land 'o' 'u"t'ing Ilsl15t2and3.11e/4/Ac't"in)ile''ii'ui"o^{i-'l L""oip"iivli';t'' lvlanoharabad} Mandar,^{Medak Eristric u. prttrdu,.by issuing pass'boox by rir noring the land} from the^{list of prohibitrrn pending disposal of the writ petition'}

¶19

Counsel^{for the Petitio ner : SRI'M'KRUPAKAR}

¶20

Counsel^{for the Respc nclents : SRI'J'AMRUTHRAO / AGP FOFI' RE''r'ENUE}

¶21

The Court^{made the fc llowingORDER}

¶22

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.9945 of 2023

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Heard Sri M. Krupakar, learned^{counsel appearing} for the petitioner and Sri J. Amruth^Rao,learned Assistant Government Pleader for^{Revenue appearing for} respondents. Pemsed the record.

¶26

Petitioner is claiming that he^is the^{absolute owner} and possessor of land admeasuring^{Ac.5-37 gts., in} Sy.Nos.tt9lL?A,AA,E, tl9/15/2e3,^rt9l4A,AAand Il9/l7B situated at Jeedipally^{village,Manoharabad} mandal, Medak District, on the strength^{of a registered} sale deed bearing document^{No.5371 of 20 19 dated} 30-01-2019 executed by Sri Katikala^{Thirumala and} Mr.Baindla Balraj. In proof of^{the same, he has filed} copies of registered sale deed and^{latest and old pattedar} pass books and title deeds issued in^{favour of his vendor'} Even then, the aforesaid tands^{are mentionedin Revenue}

/
/

records as Prohibitory'. Therefore, he lras sr--rbrtritted two onlir.rc a1 rplications Dharani relerer ,:: bearing Nos.23OOOI,7360 and 230000T364 rlated 2O-O2-2O23 with r,:spc, r<lent No.2 with a reque.st t:, dr:lete the aforesaid la nr1 from the prohibited lisl anc irls,t mutate his tlame aed issue E-pattedar passbo:,,,is. Despite receivin g and acknowledging the said online :pplications, responclent No. 2 did not act upon the, santr,, therefore, the present vr-it petition.

¶31

Where,: s learned Assistant Governmenl ple:ader for Revenur:, on iestructions, u,ould submit that respondent No.2 will corLsider the said online applir:ati.rrs; s.bmitted by the petitroner and pass appropriatr: orclers, in accorclance r.,ir_h law.

¶32

It r s rr: levalt to note that in superse;:;iorr of the Telangana Fl ghts in Land and pattadar- pal;,;5ooks Act, l97l (Act, 26 of 197 ll, the State promtrigated the Telangana R g)tts in l,ar-rd and pattadar. pasr;ltooks Act,

¶33

¶34

{ I

¶35

2O2O l\ct 9 ol2O2Ol. Act 9 of 2O20 simplified procedure of entries in revenue records and confined to three circumstances in which request can be made for alteration of entries in revenue records i.e. sale/gift/mortgage, succession/ survivorship/inheritance and by way of Court decree.

¶36

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this writ petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.2 to consider the online applications Dharani reference bearing Nos.23O000736O and 2300007364 dated 2O-O2-2O23 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law by putting the petitioner and all affected parties on notice and affording them an opportunity. He shall also consider the instructions CCLA's issued by the Chief Secretar5r in Ref.No.CMROl369ll2O22, dated O3-ll-2O22. If respondent No.2 is not inclined to accept the claim / request of the petitioner, he shall assign specific reasons, pass a reasoned order and shall communicate copy of the

¶37

¶38

said order lo the petitioner. He shall comprlc. e the entire exercise r.,,,ithrn a period of eight (8) weeks .t.rm the date of receipt ol :: copy of this order. There sha l be no order as to ccrsts.

¶39

As a ;equel, the miscellaneous petiti:rns, if any,

¶40

pending in r. tc Writ Petition shall starrd close <l

¶41

//rRUE coPY//^{ASsrs,rA,iitEmYIXA} To sEc;ilbjN oFFrcER 1 2 iffii;*:':l fi:,^iffil""enue Department, secretar zr , State or 2 4 5, . ifli d,{fi ;H-ffit -t;r"g',5rni:?#, r r ] a n sa na a, 6 7 ff:33^{rosnr v.xRupAKAR, Advocate} [opuc] S.A GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:1310412023

ORDER

//'
Nql
I <br>1t
-:.-

¶46

WP.No.9945 cf²⁰²³

¶47

DISPOSING^{C)F THE W.P}

¶48

WITHOUT CC^STS.

¶49

)
::
{
c
n

L.Chandra Sekhar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Chandra Sekhar Reddy 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

M/s. Shubham Transoceanic Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Company Law Board

S.V Industries Modern Rice Mills Vs Food Corporation of India., Regional office, 3rd floor

K. Rama Devi, Hyderabad. Vs the Union of India, Rep.by Secretary, REV.DEPT.,NEWDELHI,AND2

Sri Satya Harischandra Sivaseva Samithi Vs The State of Telangana

Moodoju Kistaiah Vs State of Telangana

Sri. Kawampally Mallaiah , Mallesh Vs The State of Telangana