Disposed

Vangapalli Indira v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Feb 2024WP/2454/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging inordinate delay in mutation of names and issuance of pattadar passbook. The Court directed the respondent officers to consider the mutation application by issuing notices to interested parties and passing orders within 45 days.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider Dharani Application LM2100021872 for mutation and issue of pattadar passbook within 45 days by noticing interested parties.

Vangapalli Indira Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN^REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 2 454 oF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Vanqapalli lndira, Wo. Late Vangapalli^{Eshwaraiah, Agedabout 65 years,} occl House Hoh, R/o. H.No.11-3:13/G1,^{Sridara Nilayam, NearRamalayam} Temple, Saroor Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶9

Vanqapalli Soma Sandeep, S/o.^{Late Eshwaraiah, Aged about.65 years,Occ.} Hou6e Hold, R/o. H.l.lo.11-3-13/Gl,^{Sridara Nilayam,Near Ramalayam} Temple, Saroor Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of Telangana, Represent^{by its Principal Secretiary, Revenue} Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

2 The District Collector, Suryapet, Suryapet^{Diskict, Telangana.}

¶14

3 The Revenue Divisional Officer,^{Suryapet, Suryapet District, Telangana.}

¶15

The Tahsildar and Joint^{Registrar, Tirumalagiri, Tirumalagiri Mandal, Suryapet} Diskict.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under^p.Jlicle 2i/s of the^{Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavit filed therewith,the High Court maybe} pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order^{or Direction, more particularly one in} the nature of Writ of Mandamus,^{declaring the action of the 2rd respondent in not} mutating/upload/entering^{Petitioners names in the onlineDharaniRecordsand} issuance of Pattadar^{Passbookfor the land in Sy.No. 96/6 admeasuringto an} extent of Ac. 1-09 Guntas,^{situated at Velishala Village, Thirumalagiri Mandal,} Suryapet District, as illegal,^{arbitrary, and contraryto the provisions of Telangana}

¶18

ROR Act and violation of^{Article 300-A of constitutionof lndia, and consequently} direct the 2nd Respondent^{to mutating/upload/entering Petitioners namesin the} online Dharani Records^{and issue Pattadar Passbook for the land in sy.No.96/6} admeasuring to an^{extent of Ac. 1-09 Guntas, situatedat VelishalaVillage,} Thirumalagiri Mandal, Suryapet^District.

¶19

Prayer is amended as^per Court Order^{dated 23.02-2024in l.A'No.3ot 2024}

¶20

A NO:^'f OF 2024

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{praying that in the circumstances stated in} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition, the High Court maybe pleased to} direct the Respondent^{No.2 considerthe Petitioneronlineapplicationwith} reference No. LM2 10002^{1872for mutation of land and issue PattadarPassbook} for the land in Sy.No.^{96/6 admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 1'09 Guntas,situated} - at Velishala Village, Thirumalagiri Mandal, Suryapet District, pending disposal of th€ main Writ Petition.

¶22

Prayer is amended as^per Court^{Order dated23.02.2024 in l.A.No'3of 2024}

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioners:^{SRI THOOM SRINIVAS}

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents:^{AGP FORREVENUE}

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶26

HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.2454 OF 2024

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This writ petition is filed to declare action of respondent No.2District Coltector, Suryapet District, in not considering Dharani Application vrde Reference No.LM2100021872 submitted by the petitioners for mutation of their names in the revenue records and for issuance of pattadar passbooks in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.1-09 Gts in Survey No.96/6 situated at Velishala Village, Thirumalagiri Mandal, Suryapet District, as being arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia.

¶30

Heard learned counsel for the^petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, and^perused the material available on record.

¶31

Petitioner No.1 is the mother of^petitioner No.2. lt is stated that late Mr. Vangapalli Eshwaraiah, who is the husband of^{petitioner No.1} and the father of^petitioner No.2, was the^paftadar and^{possessorof the} subject land having acquired the sarne through^{his ancestors. His} name was recorded as^pattadar and^possessor in the^{revenue records} from 1987€8 onwards. Even today, the narne of the^{father of petitioner} No.2 is being reflected in the revenue records/Dharani^records.

¶32

¶33

¶34

lt is further stated that the father of petitioner No.2 died on 10.08.2006 leaving behind petitioner No.1 (wife), petitioner No.2 (son) and his two daughters viz., Vangapalli Sunitha and Vangapalli Anitha as his successors. lt is also stated that the daughters of late Mr. Vangapalli Eshwaraiah do not have objection for issuing mutation proceedings and pattadar passbooks in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners submifted Dharani Application vide Reference No.LM2100021872 seeking mutation and issuance of pattadar passbooks. As there is inordinate delay on the part of the respondents in considering the said application, the petitioners are constrained to approach this Court.

¶35

Learned Assistant Government^pleader for Revenue submitted that as per Dharani extracts enclosed along with the writ petition, the nature ofthe subject land is shown as "Houses'.

¶36

However, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the subject land is still agriculture in nature and the entry shown as "Houses" in the Dharani records is wrong.

¶37

ln the above facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos.2 and 5 to consider the Dharani Application vrde Reference No.LM2100021872 submifted by the petitioners for mutation of their names in the revenue records and for issuance of

¶38

¶39

¶40

pattadar passbook in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.1{9 Gts in Survey No.96/6 situated at Velishala Village, Thirumalagiri Mandal, Suryapet District, by issuing notices to all the interested persons/daughters of late Mr. Vangapalli Eshwaraiah and pass orders in accordance with law within a period of forty-five (45) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.

¶41

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

¶42

in this writ petition stand closed.

¶43

SD/. P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶44

NOTE: That the extent of the land read in prayer portions and in the order dated 01.o2.fr21 in wi-rio:iii iiicit t";;;;sit mentioned as^,,Ac.1-06 guntas', ana ttre-same iJ corrected and . subs-tituted as^,,Ac.1-09-_ g-untas;; aj"-pei"i:or"rt o.a., O"t"o 23.02.2024 in t.A.No.3 ot 2Of4.

¶45

This amended order shall substitute the earlier order which has already been dispatche a on Zs.Oz.iOii

¶46

SD/- P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

To,

SECTION OFFTCER

The Diskict Collector, Suryapet, Suryapet District, Telangana.

¶51

The Revenue Divisionat Officer, Suryapet, Suryapet District, Telangana.

¶52

3' The Tahsildar and Joint Registrar, Tirumaragi , Tirumaragiri Mandar, suryapet

¶53

One CC to SRt THOOM SR|NIVAS, Advocare [OpUC]

¶54

Two CCs to Gp for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶55

Two CD Copirgs

¶56

MP GJP g

¶57

HIGH COURT

¶58

DATED:0110212024 2310212024

¶59

,.J. r1_ cl a
r)
,l
.
o 2 I tl3 ?il21 l
t L//
OE
AMENDED ORDER

¶60

WP.No.2454 of 2024

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶62

:.9
6)(,s"

¶63

WITHOUT COSTS

Vangapalli Indira v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vangapalli Indira 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

Nawab Mir Muzaffar Ali Khan Vs State of Telangana

Palle Chandrappa Vs The State of Telangana

Merla Naresh Vs The State of Telangana

KandulaSimhaRao Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. B.Nagesh Vs The State of Telangana

K.Venkat Reddy Vs The State of Telangana