Allowed

Smt.J.Dhanamma @ J. Dhani v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Oct 2024WP/27118/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the Writ Petition quashing a rejection order passed by the District Collector without assigning reasons. The impugned order suppressing claims of ownership over agricultural lands was set aside. The matter was remanded to the Collector for fresh consideration and a reasoned decision within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned rejection order set aside; matter remanded to Respondent No. 2 to pass a reasoned order after issuing notices to the petitioner and interested parties.

Smt.J.Dhanamma @ J. Dhani Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 27118 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt.J.Dhanamma @ J. Dhani, W/o.J.Pandya, Aged about 46^years, occ. Agriculture Fyo.Usirikapally Village, Shivampet Mandal Medak District, Telangana State

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Secretary, Dept of Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The District Collector, Medak District, Telangana.

¶13

3 The Tahasildar, Shivampet Mandal, Medak District, Telangana State

¶14

4 Sri. T. Krishna Rao, Sio. Sri. T. Narayana Rao Aged and Occ.^Not known to the petitioner Fl/o.Usirikapally Village, Shivampet lvlandal ti/edak District, Telangana State

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 o'( the Constitution of lndia^praying thatⁱⁿ the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or a direction, more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in^rejectingthe petitioners online grievance application bearing No. .2300155300 (application dated 13-'10-2023) without assigning any^reasons and^{without taking into} consideration the^{petitioners patta passbook,} 13-B certificate,^{pahanies submitted} by the petitioner as arbitrary, unjust and against the^{principles of natural justices,} in respect of the^{petitioners property} consisting of^{lands in Sy.No.66/l'1(old} Sy.No.66) to an extent of Ac.0-'19^guntas and^{in Sy.No.67ll (oldSy.No.67)to an} extent of Ac.3- 13^guntas situated at Usirikapally^{Village, ShivampetMandal,} Medak District, Telangana State, and consequently^{setasidethe re.iectionorder}

¶17

passed by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings No.D1l21Ol2OZ4 at Serial No.2 (the heading of the proceedings shows August 2024 but the signature date shows 2710812024), declaring the same as illegal and the 2nd respondent may be directed to pass fresh order on the above mentioned petitioner online grievance application, after issuing notices to all the interested parties including the 4th respondent, taking into consideration the petitioners patta passbook, pahanies, 13-B certificate correct entries in dharani portal and issue new patta passbook for the Petitioner's agricultural lands mentioned above and also declaring the highhanded action of the official respondents in passing order of rejection on the petitioner online grievance application without reasons as arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300-4of Constitution of lndia.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

Petition under section 15'1 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to pass fresh order on the online grievance application bearing No. 23001 55300 (application dated 13-1 0-2023) after issuing notices to all the interested parties including the 4rh respondent, taking into consideration the petitioners old patta passbook, pahanies, 13-B certificate and correct entries in dharani portal and issue new Patta passbook for the petitioners agricultural lands in sy.No.66/l l (old sy.No.66) to an extent of Ac.0-19 guntas and in Sy.No.67/l (old Sy.No.67) to an extent of Ac.3-'13 guntas situated at Usirikapally Village, shivampet lvlandal, Medak District, Telangana state, pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of equity of justice.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. OM LAW FIRM

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.4:--

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.27lL8 of 2024

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. I to 3. Perused the record.

¶28

2, In view of the nature of relief sought by the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage dispensing with notice to respondent No.4.

¶29

Petitioner is claiming that she is the absolute owner 1n and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.0-19^gts., 1n Sy.No.66 and Ac.3-13 gts., Sy.No.67 situated at Usirikapally village, Shivampet Manda-I, Medak District. In proofl of the same, she has filed copy of old pattadar pass book and title deed. In the latest pattadar pass book and title deed and Dharani portal the said land is missing and respondent No.4 name is mentioned in respect of the

¶30

¶31

KL.J \t .P .No.27 I I a ot 2024

¶32

¶33

subject property erroneously. Therefore, she has submitted online application bearing No.2300155300 dated 13.1O.2O23 with respondent No.2 with a request to correct the said wrong entries and issue E-pattedar pass book and title deeds. The same was rejected with one word 'Rejected'. Challenging the said rejection order, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

¶34

+.^{Perusal of the record would revea_l} that respondent No.2 rejected the said online application with one word 'Rejected'. No reasons were assigned. Any order passed without assigning reasons is an order passed without application of mind and it is non est. Therefore, without going into the merits and demerits of the case only on the said ground the impugned rejection order is set aside. The matter is remand back to respondent No.2 with a direction to consider the online application bearing No.23OO155300 dated 13.1O.2O23 submitted by the petitioner seeking correction of the wrong entries and pass orders afresh by putting the petitioner arrd

¶35

KL.J W.P.No.27l Ia of 2O2a

¶36

.,)

¶37

respondent No.4 on notice and affording them an opportunity. If, respondent No.2 is not inclined to accept the request made by the petitioner, he shall pass a reasoned order and communicate copy of the said order to the petitioner. He sha,ll complete the entire exerclse within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶38

g. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is aLlowed. There shall be no order as to costs

¶39

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending

¶40

in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶41

EVI SD/-T.^TIRUM ASSISTANT GI AR

¶42

¶43

To,

¶44

//TRUE^COPY// SECTION FFICER

¶45

I . The Secretary,^{Dept of Revenue' Secretariat' The State of Telangana'}

¶46

l. **f :s;xfgi+wtr+pii*^{tr: ::i::T::: ",} Hvderabad [OUT] o. Two CD^CoPies TJ

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 11012024

"f r1
o''
-.i
r)
i./ 10 eii 20l{
:J

¶51

ORDER

¶52

WP.No.27118 of 2024

¶53

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION

¶54

WITHOUT COSTS

¶55

<br>\e>u

Smt.J.Dhanamma @ J. Dhani v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.J.Dhanamma @ J. Dhani 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Khadar Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Basheer Ahmed, Vs The State of Telangana

Mustari Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.Rukki Bai Vs The State of Telangana

Thalla Lakshmi Bai Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Banoth Hemoji Vs State of Telangana