Disposed

Maqbool Azlapuram v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC5 Nov 2024WP/18122/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging rejection of an online application for mutation of land in the petitioner's name and issuance of e-pattadar passbooks. The court directed the petitioner to file a fresh application with all documents and required the respondents to examine it after notice to interested parties and pass reasoned orders within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to file fresh mutation application with documents; respondents directed to consider it after notice and pass reasoned orders within three months.

Maqbool Azlapuram Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32s6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY. THE FIFTH DAY^{OF NOVEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENTYFOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI^{JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY}

¶6

WRIT PETI TION NO^{: 18122OF 2024}

¶7

Between:

¶8

Ivlaobool Azlapuram, S/o^{Mohammad Moulani, aged about 51 years.,Occ'} Agri'culture, Rio^{H.No.9-17, Bhairampalle Village, MaganoorMan0al'} Narayanpet District.

¶9

...PET|T|ONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its Principal Secretary,Revenue} Oepartment Secreiariat^{BuildinalsecretariatHyderabad}

¶12

Th6 District Collector,^{Narayanpet, NarayanpetDistrict'}

¶13

ffr. n"r.nre^{Divisional Officei, Narayanpet Division, NarayanpetDistrict}

¶14

The Tahsildar,^{[',4aganoorl,4andal,Narayanpet District}

¶15

...RESpONDENTS

¶16

Petition under^{Article 226 ol lhe constitutionof India prayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affjdavitfiled therewith,the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue an appropriate^{writ, orderor directionmore parttcularlyone in the} nature of writ of^{t,4andamusdeclaring the action of the respondent No 2 in issuing} theRejectionordervideappIicationNo,240O0O1655dated09,o2,2024and rejecting the online^{application of the petitioner, without having any valid grounds'} without assigning any^{reasons and he did not initiated to mutate the name of the} petitioner and issue e-pattadar^{passbookon his cultivatingland to an extent of} Ac.3.13^gts in sy.No.123lA^{which is situated at Bhairampalli Revenue Village'} l/aganoor Mandal,^{Narayanpet District, is highly illegal, arbitrary,unconstitutional,} violation of Principles^{of Natural Justice and alsoin violation of Article 14,21 and} 300-A of the constitution^{of lndia and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to} consider the online^{applicationof the petitionerfor mutate the name of the} petitioner and issue e-pattadar^{passbookon his cultivating land to an extent of} Ac.3'l3gtsinSy'No.123lAwhichissituatedatBhairampalliReVenueVillage, lvlaganoor lr/andal,^{Na rayanpet District.}

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶18

Petition unde!' Sectron 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to consider the online application of the petitioner No. 2400001655 dated 09.02.2024 for mutate the name of the petitioner and issue e-pattadar passbook on his cultivating land to an extent of Ac.3.'13 gts in Sy.No.123/A which is situated at Bhairampalli Revenue Village, Maganoor Mandal, Narayanpet District, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶19

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed n supporl of the petition, the High Courl may be pleased to expedite the nearin,l to an early date for the hearlng of the matter in cfcumstances oF tle above facts

¶21

Counsel for the Petitroner: SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶24

1VRIT PETITION No.18122 of 2024

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶27

India, is filed seeking the following reliei

¶28

''. ..lo issue an oppropnate LL)nt. order or d.irectpn mare portrculorLll ane in the nafitre of Wnl oJ NfondanttLs declanng lhe octior of the respotld"nl No 2 in issrrirrg the Rejectio| Order ide oppllceftou iio ).1AAOO15),; dakd 49.02.2421 and.eJectltL(J tle on.LrrLe a1ryltt'aftott of tlte p.,tttbtrc.r Lurthout haulng antl ualtl grottnds, tultltout osstotltng arLrl rt:osons nnd he dtd not inittated to mutate the name of the petttioner and rssue e pattadar passboofu on hls culttuattng land to an ertenl a.[ Acs.,3 13 gfs rn SA.No.123/A ruhrch is situated at Bhatrontpallt ReL'enue Vi[LcL(]e. Maganoor LlandaL NaraAanpel Dtstnct ts htglLlg illegoL, arbrtrory. unconstituttonal, vtoLation oJ Pnnciples of Natural Justrce and also in ui.o[ation of Arltcles 14, 21 and 30AA oI the Constitution of India and consequentlg direct the 2"d respondent to constder the online application of the pettttoner Jor mutqte the name of the petitioner and issue epattadar passbook on his cultiuating Land to an ertent of Acs.3-13 gts in Sa.No.123/A uthich is situdted at Bhairampalli Reuenue Village, Maganoor Mandal, Naraganpet Distrtct. . . .'

¶29

Considered the submissions of Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶30

The petitioner claims to be the ou'ner and possessor o[ Iand admeasuring Acs.3 13 guntas in Sv.No. 123/A situa[ed :lt Bhairampalli Revenue Village, Maganoor Mandal, Naral'anpct District, which has been purchased b1'his father through registered sale deed uide document No.49 1 ol 2000 dated 26.06.2000 irom its original o,{:ners. It is the further case of the petitioner that he

1-2

submitted an online application uide No. 24000O 1655 dated 09.O2.'2O24 for issuance of ne!v e-pattadar passbooks and for mr-rtarion oi hts name in all the revenue records in respe.ct oi the sard propenr, as per the provisions of the Telangana Rlghts in Land iincl Ptilta.lrlr P,rss F3ooks Act, 2O2O ([or shorr^'Ar:t, 20201, bLtt the siiicr applicatirr has been rejected bl' the respondents \'ithout assiqnine r1n\ rcilsons.

¶35

Learned r:ounsel for the petitioner submitted that Section 6 the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act,2O2O (for short 'AcL, 2O2O), confers power on the Tahsildar to update the Record of Rights when rights over land! are acquired through succession, survivorship, or inheritance. Legal heirs or family members must reach a consensus on how to divide the land and submrt a joint agreement online. The Tahsildar, after assigning a convenient clatt and time, r,"'ill verifl,' the documents and collect mlrt:rrion charses. Upon verification, the Tahsildar u..i11 instantly lrpclatc the reco:-cls aLnd issue either a neu or updated Pattadar Pass Boo x-clun-'l'r tl -' Dccd, along u ith .1n extrztct ol the changes. The heirs :rre :rls,r ri quired to flrnish [:imil1' de tatls fo: inclusion in the updated title deeds and Section 7 of the Act, 2020 empow.ers the Tahsildar to u pdate the Record of Rights w.hen ownership is acquired through a court decree. The person holding the decree

¶36

¶37

must applv online lor an appointmenr. On the schecluled date, rhrTahsildar r'"'ill verilv ii the decr.e alisn5^q,i15 rhr. exisrinq records Ii relevant fees are paid, the Tahsildar u'rll rmmedratelv updare the records, transferring the land from the judgmcnt debtor to thc decree holder. A new or updated Pattadar Pass Book-cum-Title Deed will be issued, and the judgment debtor wrll be directed to produce their title deed for necessary changes.

¶38

0 {

¶39

In view of the said submissions and since it is stated that the respondents have rejected the application of the petitioner stating that the petitioner has not enclosed any documents in support of the application for mutating his name in the revenue records, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met, ii the petitloner is direcred to submir a fresh application bv dutlv enclosir.rg all the documents, rvhich are required for mutating his name in rhe revenue records and for issuance of e-pattadar passbooks in respcct of the subject lands. [n the event oi liling such applicatron, rhe respondents are dtrected to examine the same after issuing notices to all the interested parties and pass reasoned order in accordance with law and communicate the decision thereon to the petirioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

i I t

6 With the above^{observations this writ petition is disposed of}

¶44

No order as to^costs

¶45

As a sequel, the^{miscelianeouspetitions pending'if any'}

¶46

sha11 stand^closed.

¶47

//TRUE COPY//

¶48

SD/. T. TIRUMALA,/DEVI ASSTSTANT REGIqTRAR ,/

t'.t

SECTION OFFICER

1 I!! lrypqt Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buitding,

¶53

Secretariat f yoeraoad State of Telahgana. 2 tne Urstnct Col'ecto.. Narayanpet, Narivanoet Djstrict

¶54

3 I he Heven-e D ,":sionat Offlcer, Narayanpei Drvision. Narayanper District. 4 The Tahsitdar t,4aga"oor Mandal, fliiivS*"t oi.irilt^' 5 9." 99^{to sRt RA?oLU eHnSKAR,} ,Ad"oirtljijFirbr 6 Two CCs to Gp FOR REVENUE, H,gfr Corrt iJr'Inei-tjte ot Tetargana, at Hyderabad [OU-t]

7 Tvt o CD Copres

I'SK ( t.⁾ t

HIGH COURT

DATED:0511112024

ORDER 1 E L 4
s\l '7
A.Y
WP.No.18122 ot 2024 rD R"
I Ftu S:r<br>('b
c)
* (
o 1l.i

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶62

1,0
t.b
72ttu

Maqbool Azlapuram v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maqbool Azlapuram 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

G. Mallesh Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Yaseen Vs The State of Telangana

Muppidi Ambuja Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 7 others

Maramraju Appa Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Maramraju Appa Rao Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Gangishetty Bikshapathi Vs The State of Telangana