Petitioner challenged Tahsildar proceedings digitally signing survey land in favour of his sister under Dharani without enquiry. The court found e-pattadar passbooks were consequential to prior entries under the ROR Act, 1971, which petitioner had not questioned, and left him to agitate entitlement before a civil court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[32e6 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 24725 OF 2024
Between:
Miryala Prathap Rao, S/o. Late Hanmanth Rao Aged about65 years,Occ Agiiculture R/o. H. No. 1- 34, Dilawarpur Village, Khanapur Mandal,Nirmal District.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitutionof lndiaprayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiledtherewith, the High Court maybe pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, moreparticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring thelmpugned Proceedingsof the 5th respondent in Procgs. No.P,130712O24, dt. 19.08.2024whereby grantingthe approval for digital signing of Sy.No. 11812lo an extentof Ac. 3.13 gts situated at Sathanapally Village, Khanapur Mandal,Nirmal Districtin the Dharani Statusin favour of the 6th respondent contrary to hisown earlier orderspassdin Proceedings No. 8130712024, dt. 0608.2024as illegal,arbitrary, unconstitutional, against theprinciples of naturaljustice and in violation of the provisionsof ROR Act and without conducting enquiryby consideringthe objections of the petitioner and consequently bysetting aside the lmpugned Proceedingsof the Sth
'/ ,,. pursuant respondent, to the direct lmpugned Proceedings the RespondentNos. of the2 to5 Sthnot respondent to alter the dt. revenue 19.08'2024 recordby conducting the enquiry takinginto considerationof the objections of the petitioner and giving opportunity to thepetitionerin the interestof justice.
A O: 1OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPCprayingthat in the circumstances stated In the.affidavitfiled in support of the petition,the High Court may be pleased to dirgct theRespondent Nos. 2 to 5 not to change in the Dharani Portal pertaining to Sy. No 11812 toan extent of Ac. 3.13gts situated at SathanapaltyVillage, KhanapurMandal, Nirmal District, pursuant to the lmpugned Proceedings of the Sth reqpondentin Procgs.No. 8/307/2024,dt. 19.08.2024, pending disposal of th9 abovewrit petition
NO: o 024
Between:
Petition under Section151 CPC praying thatin the circumstances stated in the affi(avit filed in support ofthe petition, theHigh Court maybe pleased tp vacate lfre orfer dated 6.9.2024passedin l.A.No.1 ot 2O24in W.P.No 24725 of 2024, inthe interestsof justice.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C. HARI PREETH
Counsel for the RespondentNo.1 to 5: ASST.GP FOR REVENUE
Counsgl for the Respondent No.6:SRI N. SREEDHARREDDY
The Cor;rt made the following:ORDER
r T
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.24725 of 2024
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliet_
"..19 r.ssye an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ "f frf""a"-"",- jectaring the Impugned proceedings of the S* .""po"J"", in Procgs. No.-Bl 30T 12024, dat;d_ t9.OA.2o2+ *trereuy 'graiiing tf,e lpp^.?r^rl .fordigital signing of Sy.No.188/2 ,o'^i- .*i".,, or Ac.J. rJ gts., situated at Sathanapallv Village, Khanapur Mandal, Nirmal District in the Dharani Siatus in. farrou.'oi-tn. respondent contrary to his ou,n earher orders passed O,nin Proceedings. No.B/3O7 /2O2+, dt.06.O8.2024 r" iit"grr.'IiU,,.u.,' . unconstitutional, against the principles of natural ir"i,."-".,a i., violation of the provisions of ROR Act and *itfroi,t-.o'.,ar.tl.rg enquiry by_ considering the objections of tt. p.iitio.,.. "r,a ::.n_"-.:""":lyby.sertingaside the Impugnedproceedingsof the r-, respondent, dlrect the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 not to-alter the revenue record pursuant to the Impugned proceedings of the Srt ::"_l?l^9lldr.t9.08.202.4by conductins the enquiry"iaking rnto consrderatron of the objections of the petitionei and giving opportunity to the petitioner in the interlst of justice, ana to pass such other order or orders as this Hontrle C"ou.t rnar.,deem fit arld proper in the circumstances o[ the case'-
\
2
CVBR,J wp_.24725_2024
his father, respective shares have been mutated in favour of the petitioner and other co-sharers. [t is also stated that when an application has been submitted by respondent No.6 on 27.04.2024 for issuance of e-pattadar passbooks as per the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O (for short "the ROR Act, 2O2O"l but the same was rejected by the Tahsildar vide proceedings No.B/3O7 12O24, dated O6.Oa.2O24 stating that "on verification of Dharani Status in the status aadhar and EKYC completed Digital Signing of survey No.1 18/2 extent 3.13O0 guntas'. Thereafter, once again considering the application submitted by the 6ft respondent, proceedings have been issued by the Tahsildar vide proceedings No.Bl3O7 12024, dated 19.O8.2O24 stating that "on verification of Dharani status in the status aadhar and EIC|C completed Digital Signing of survey No.118/2 extent 3.1300 guntas". It is further stated that the 6ft respondent is not entitled for issuance of e-pattadar passbooks in the absence of arriving any consensus settlement among the family members and more particularly, initially when the application submitted U1 tf1 6d respondent has been rejected, the Tahsildar is not having any power to consider for issuance of e-pattadar pass
/
CVBR.J wp 24725_2021
books and consequentialentries in Dharaniportal as per the prqvisions ol the ROR Act,2O2O.
\
I
CVBR.J wp-21725*2024
\
the provisions of Act, 2O2n. k is further stated that under the provisions of the ROR Act,2O2O e-pattadar passbooks have been issued and there is no change of entries nor any corrections : being carried out, therefore, no valid rights of the petitioner have been effected.
,l
)
CVBR. J \Yp_24723_2021
of.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,
shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD
//TRUE coPY//
ASSISTANTREGISTRAR
sEcrtoN Srrtcen
To, 1 . The PrincipalSecretary Revenue Department The Stateof Telangana' Secretariat,HYderabad. 2 i;;'Cil;ib",i,ri.Jion"tof Land Administration'NampallvStation Road Abids. Hvderabad J i[" oitiiiiLCollector.Nirmal District, Nirmal' Revenue DistrictNirmalrown and A i# il;;;;;;-orisionrroti*']lii"t 0istrict 5 ih" iin.ior"r,Khanapur Mandal NirmalDistrict .. ^. 6. o; bCi;snrc.-HAht PREETH, AdvocatetoPu-cl- ^. 7 . . 5; d6 i; siiiN. sREEDHARREDDY, Advqcalg1o-Pucl - - n . i;; ccri" Gpion nevrruue,Higi' court for the state of relangana IOUT] o. Two CD CoPies BN $ B$
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 211112024
ORDER
WP.No.24725 ot2024
( 1 !l o t4
//.
f'
oto 2 I il0t/ 20it
*
r (<br>
DISPOSING OFTHE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
@,4# 9K,r
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tahsildar could lawfully issue e-pattadar passbooks to respondent No.6 without a fresh enquiry despite an earlier rejection of her application.
Whether issuance of e-pattadar passbooks under the ROR Act, 2020 was merely consequential to earlier entries made under the ROR Act, 1971.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Miryala Prathap Rao
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department Secretariat, Hyderabad
The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Nampally Station Road, Abids, Hyderabad
The District Collector, Nirmal District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal Revenue District, Nirmal Town and District
The Tahsildar, Khanapur Mandal, Nirmal District
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
