Disposed

Avula Anjaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Dec 2024WP/18855/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging orders dismissing a review and allowing an appeal regarding land titles and e-Pattadar Passbooks. The court declined to decide on merits, directing parties to participate in the ongoing de novo enquiry by the Tahsildar.

What did the court decide?

Order displacing parties to participate in the enquiry by the Tahsildar and consequential issuance of Pattedar Passbooks within three months.

Avula Anjaiah Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 18855 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Avula Anjaiah, S/o. late Yellaiah, Age 55^years, Occupation Agriculture, Rl/o.Piftampally village, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶9

Avula Kistaiah, S/o. late Yellaiah, Age 60^years, Occupation Agriculture, R:/o.Piftampally village, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,^Revenue Department, T.S., Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Special Tribunal, Nalgonda District Rep. by its Collector^{and District} Megistrate, Nalgonda

¶14

Additional Collector (Revenue), Nalgonda.

¶15

The Special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue^{Divisional Officer,} Nalgonda

¶16

The Tahsildar, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶17

Smt. Tummala Nagamani, W/o. Sathi Reddy, Age 62^{years, Occupation.} Housewife, R/o. H.No.'l 1-'14-312, Sirinagar Colony,^{L.B.Nagar,Hyderabad} 500 074.

¶18

Tummala Sathi Reddy, S/o.late Ramchandra Reddy, Age 65^years, Occupation. Housewife, Fi/o. H.No.1^'l -14-312, Sirinagar Colony,^L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad 500 074.

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia^{prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Court maybe} pleased to issue an order or direction, more^particularly in the nature of^{Writ of} Certiorari calling for the records vide case New^Case No.F2lSpl.TribunallO74212021 , (old Case^{No.8/948/2017)} both^orderdated 7-7-2021 and 30-01-2021^passed by^{2nd respondent dismissing review of the}

¶21

petitioners allowing appeal filed by the unofficial respondent No.6 and 7 is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of principles of natural justice and liable to bet set-aside.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶23

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 impugned order vide new Case No.F2lSpl.Tribunall1742l2O2l , (old Case No.8/94812017) both dated 7-7-2021 and 30-1-2021 passed by 2nd respondent authority for the land admeasuring 5-22 guntas in Survey No.1g0 (extent of Ac.1-07 gts.), Sy.No.226 (extent of Ac.2-29), Sy.No.227 (extent of Ac.1-07 gts) situated at Pittampally village, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District pending writ petition in the interest of justice.

¶24

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶25

Between:

¶26

Smt. Tqpm{a Nagamani, W/o. Sathi Reddy, Age 62 years, Occupation. Housewife, R/o. H.No.11-'14-312, Sirinagar Colony, L.B.Nagar, Hyd6rabad 500 074.

¶27

Tummala Sathi Reddy, S/o.late Ramchandra Reddy, Age 65 years, Occupation. Housewife, Rlio. H.No.11-'14-312, Sirinagar'Colony, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad 500 074.

¶28

...PETITIONERS/RR6&7

¶29

AND

¶30

Avula Anjaiqf , S1o. late Yellaiah, Age 55 years, Occupation Agriculture, R/o.Pittampally village, Chityal Mandat, Nalgonda District.

¶31

Avula Kistaiah, S/o. late Yellaiah, Age 60 years, Occupation Agriculture, FL/o.Pittampally village, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶32

. . RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITONERS

¶33

Ihe State of- Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, T.S., Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶34

The Special Tribunal, Nalgonda District Rep. by its Collector and District Megistrate, Nalgonda

¶35

Additional Collector (Revenue), Nalgonda.

¶36

The Special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda

¶37

The Tahsildar, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶38

...RESPONDENTS

¶39

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in^{the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High^{Court may be pleasedto} VACATE the lnterim Orders Dated 23.08.2021 in lA^{No.1 of 2021 in WP} No.18855 of 2021 thereby DISMISSING the same.

¶40

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI GANDYADAPU^RAJESHAM

¶41

Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 to 5: GP^{FOR REVENUE}

¶42

Counsel for the Respondent No.6^{& 7: M/s.TIPPAVAJHALA SAIRAMYA} PRANEETHA

¶43

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶44

./z

¶45

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶46

WRIT PETITION NO.18855 OF 2O2I

¶47

ORDER:

¶48

This writ petition is hled by the petitioners seeking the following relief :

¶49

".....to call fo, the records uide New Ctrse No.F2/ Spl.Tribunal/ 0742/ 2021 (old Case No.B/948/2017) both orders dated 07.07.2O21 and. 30.01.2O21 passed bg respondent No.2 dismissing revieu of the petitioners allouing appeal fiIerl bg the unoJficial respondent Nos.6 and. 7 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutiotlctl and uiolation of principtes of natural justice".

¶50

It is stated that respondent Nos.6 and 7 have filed an appeal bearing No.B/94al20 17 under Section 5 (B) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, l97l (for short ROR, ActJ before the Special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda District against the order dated 20.12.2016 passed by respondcnt No.s with regard to lands in Sy.Nos.190, 226 and 227. It is further stated that the said appeal was transferred to the Special Tribunal, Nalgonda and the same was allowed by order dated 3O.O1.2O21 directing respondent No.s to conduct de novo enquiry and take necessary action for issuance of e-Pattadar Passbooks to respondent Nos.6 and 7 by duly following the procedure. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners filed review and the same was dismissed by order dated 07.O7.2021 duly upholding the order dated 30.O1.2021.

¶51

)

¶52

CVBR,J wP_18855 202 I

¶53

Challenging the above said orders dated 07 .OZ .2021 and 30.O1.2021, the present writ petition is filed

¶54

The petitioners and respondent Nos.6 and 7 are relying upon the registered sale deeds and sadabainama said to have been executed by their respective predecessors-in-interest. The issues relating to validity or otherwise of the sadabainama or the registered document in favour of either of the parties would have an impact of deciding title by this Court while appreciating the orders passed by the Special Tribunal.

¶55

It is settled law that in judicial review this Court is having a limited jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition except where on the face of the impugned order, it is found illegal or without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of law or the material required to be taken into consideration has not been considered.

¶56

Since the Special Tribunal has dismissed the review by upholding the order of conducting de nouo enquiry, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by reiegating the parties to participate in the enquiry being conducted by the Tahsildar by producing a1l the necessary documents to establish their claim for making entries in the revenue records and

¶57

CVBR,J wP 18855 202 1

¶58

¶59

¶60

consequential issuance of^{PattedarPassbooks} within^{a period of} three (3) months from the date of receipt of^{a copy of this order. It} is needless to state that the Tahsitdar shall^{conductenquiry,} without being influenced by any observations^{made by the Special} Tribunal or by this Court.

¶61

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.^{There shallbe} no order as to costs.

¶62

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions^pending, if any,

¶63

shall stand closed

¶64

SD/-]" TIRUMALA VI ASSISTANT REGI

¶65

//TRUE COPY//

¶66

SECTION OFFICER

¶67

To, 1. The Principal Secretary,^{Revenue Department,T.S.,Secretariat, Hyderabad,} State of Telangana.

¶68

The Collector and District^{[Vlagistrate, Special Tribunal, NalgondaDistrict'} Nalgonda

¶69

¶70

The Additional Collector^{(Revenue),Nalgonda.}

¶71

The Special Grade Deputy Collector and^{Revenue Divisional Officer,} Nalgonda

¶72

The Tahsildar, Chityal Mandal,^{NalgondaDistrict.}

¶73

One CC to SRI GANDYADAPU RAJESHAM,^Advocate IOPUCI

¶74

One CC to M/s. TIPPAVAJHALA^{SAIRAMYA PRANEETHA' Advocate} loPUCl

¶75

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE,^{High Court for the Stateof Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶76

Two CD Copies

BSR ,w

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0911212024

ORDER

WP.No.18855 of²⁰²¹

trlg J iA,(
( or{
o I
(.) 2 a JAtl 2c?i c
t t
o€s PnTCH (;9

¶83

DISPOSING OF THE^{WRIT PETITION,}

¶84

WITHOUT COSTS

¶85

.,r
\9P

Avula Anjaiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avula Anjaiah 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

Variyal Prern Kumar Reddy alias Jariyal Prem Kumar and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others

Choppari Anjaiah Vs Vusthem Veeresham

Peddinti Laxmi Vs The State of Telangana

Minnala Balaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Sayini Sathish and another Vs The State of Telangana and 7 others

Nallu Sakkubai Vs The State of Telangana