Disposed

Chintapally Lakshmikanta v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Dec 2024WP/35782/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Petitioner sought a mandamus to direct Revenue Authorities to rectify records and add 0.05 guntas of land to her holding, alleging illegal exclusion after her husband's death. The Court disposed of the petition by permitting her to file an online application for correction under Section 6 of the Act, 2020, directing authorities to include the missing extent within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to make an online application for missing land extent; Revenue Authorities directed to correct records and issue new pattadar passbook within three months.

Chintapally Lakshmikanta Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C,V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 35782 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Chintapally Lakshmikanta, Wo. Chintapally Achaiah Aged about 68^years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o. Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda Mandal, Nalgonda District, T.G.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Abids Road, Hyderabad, T.G.

¶14

The District Collector, Nalgonda District, T.S.

¶15

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda Revenue Division, Nalgonda District, T.S.

¶16

The Tahsildar, Nalgonda Mandal, Nalgonda District, T.S.

¶17

Chinthapally Dasharath, S/o. late Kondaiah, Aged about 32^years, Occ. Agriculture, Fi/o. Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda lVlandal, Nalgonda District, T.G.

¶18

Chinthapally Yadagiri, S/o. late Kondaiah, Aged about 35^years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o. Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda Mandal, Nalgonda District, T.G.

¶19

Chinthapally Andalu, W/o. late Kondaiah, Aged about 52^years, Occ. Agriculture, Fl/o. Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda lvlandal, Nalgonda District, TG.Chinthapally Kondaiah S/o. Venkaiah, F|/o. Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda Mandal, Nalgonda District, T.G.

¶20

.,.RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition under Article 226 ol lhe Constitution of lndia^praying that^{in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^maybe pleased to issue appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of the official respondentsⁱⁿ rectifying or correction of the revenue records by mutating the narr e of^the

¶22

petitioner in respect of the land to an extent. of Ac.0-05 gts., in Sy.No.112lA ot Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda Mandal and District by deleting the said extent from the names of the unofficial respondents No.6 to 8 herein and adding the said land in the pattadar passbook cum title deed of the petitioner vide Passbook No.128200190076 and Khata No.112 as illegal, arbitrary, unlawful and against to the principles of natural^justice and consequently direct the respondents No.1 to 4 to rectify or correct the revenue records by mutating the name of the petitioner in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.0-05 gts., in Sy.No.112lA ol Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda Mandal and District by deleting the said extent from the names of the unofficial respondents No.6 to B herein by adding the same land in the pattadar passbook cum title deed of the petitioner vide Passbook No.T28200190076 and Khata No.112

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶24

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 direct the respondents No.1 to 4 to rectify or correct the revenue records by mutating the name of the petitioner in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.0-05 gts., in Sy.No.112lA of Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda Mandal and District by deleting the said extent from the names of the unofficial respondents No.6 to B herein by adding the same land in the pattadar passbook cum title deed of the petitioner vide Passbook No.T28200190076 and Khata No.112 in the interest of justice

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DR. KADIRE KRISHNAIAH

¶26

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 5: AGP FOR REVENUE

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 8: --

¶28

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶29

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

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.35782 of 2024

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This writ petition is fi1ed with the following^relief:-

¶33

"...to issue appropiate uit^{or order or d.irectiot-Lmoreparticularlgone itt the} nature of uit oI MANDAMUS declaing the'^{indction of tleoJficial} respondents in rectifAing or conection of the^{reuenuetecordsby mutating} the name of the petitioner in respecl of the lanrl^{to an ertefttof Ac.0'05gts.'} in Sg.No.112/A of Gundlapallg Village, Nalgondct^{MandalQnd Dbtnct bA} deleting the said ertent fron the nomes of the uno^{tcial respondents No.6to} B hereia and addtng the satd land^{in the patta(|arpassbookarm tilledeed} of th.e petitioner uide Passbook^{No.T2a2OO190o76and Khata No.l 12 as} illegal, arbitrarg, unlawful and agdinst^{to the pinciples of toturaljustice} and consequentlg direct the respondents^No.lto 4^{to rectifgorcorrecl the} reuenue records bg fiutating the^name of^{the petitioner in respect of the} land to an extent of AC.O-OS^gts., it^{Sg.No.112/Aof CundlapallyVillage,} Nalgonda Mandal and Distict bg^{deleting the said extent} Jron^thenamesof the unoJrtcial respondents No.6 to I herein^{bg adding the sdnelandin the} pattadar passbook Lam title deed of the^petttioner uide^Passbook No.T282OO19OO76 and Khata No.112^{andpo.ssas otherorder or ordeing} as d-eem fit and proper in the circumstances^{of tllecose'.}

¶34

Considered the submissions of the learned^{counselfor the} parties and with their consent this writ^petition is^{disposedof at} the admission stage and in view of^{the relief sought in this writ} petition, issuance of notice to the un-official^{respondent is} dispensed with.

¶35

It is stated that originally one Chinthapally^{Venkaiah was the} pattadar and possessor of the total land admeasuring^Ac.O4-28 guntas in survey Nos.76/11, ll2l1. arrd 112/n),^situatedat Gundlapally Village, Nalgonda Mandal and District^{and his name} was also mutated in all the revenue records.. It is^{further stated} that said Chintbjr@lly Venkaiah died leaving behind^{his two sons}

¶36

¶37

¶38

CVBR, J \Yp 35782_2024

¶39

namely Chinthapally Achaiah and Chinthapally Kondaiah as his surviving legal heirs and after his death, his two sons orally partitioned the said land into equal shares i.e. Ac.O2-74 guntas each. It is further stated that at the time of mutation, Chinthapally Kondaiah who is the father of respondent Nos.6 and 7 and husband of respondent No.8 illegally got mutated his name to an extent of Ac.O2-19 guntas and Chinthapally Achaiah who is the husband of petitioner got the land to an extent of Ac.02-O9 gu ntas.

¶40

The grievance of the petitioner is that after the death of the husband ol the petitioner, she got mutated her name in the revenue records by virtue of succession/pouthi mutation vide proc.No.B/ 16829 l2OI2 dated 1O.I2.2012, but while recording the extent an cxtent of Ac.O-OS guntas was missing from the holding of the petitioner as pattadar, therefore, she made an application for seeking correction of the extent in the pattadar passbooks by amending the records and consequential issuance of the new pattadar passbooks.

¶41

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has not disputed the issuance of earlier pattadar passbooks and title deeds in favour of the petitioner and respondent Nos.e to g.

¶42

¶43

CVBR,^J wp 35782_2024

¶44

¶45

\ \

¶46

There is no dispute among the co-sharers that^{the property} stands in the name of their ancestral^{ChinthapallyVenkaiah. The} only dispute is an extent of Ac.0-05^{guntas not being added to the} share of the petitioner.

¶47

As per Section 6 of the Act,2O2O, any^person or^{persons who} acquire rights over land through^{succession,survivorship,} inheritance and seeking to effect^{change in Recordof Rights, after} arriving at consensus among all the^{legal heirs on the mannerof} division of the land among themselves,^{shall make an application,} enclosing the^joint agreement^{specifying individualshares, to the} Tahsildar through the website^{prescribedfor this purpose,for} allotting available date and time as^{per the convenienceof the} persons to appear before the Tahsildar.

¶48

In view of the above submissions, this^{Court deems it} appropriate to dispose ol the writ^{petition permittingthe petitioner} to make al online application for missing extent^{of Ac.0-05 guntas} for correction and updation of the records.^{In event of such} application is being submitted, the^{respondentauthoritiesare} directed to examine the same for^{correctionof the extent and} incorporation of the missing extent of^{Ac-O-05guntas to the} account of the^petitioner katha and^{consequential issuanceof the}

¶49

¶50

CVBR, J \,p _35782_2024

¶51

pattadar passbooks, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶52

9 With thr: abovc observations, this Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶53

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

¶54

this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶55

SDLV. KAVITHA ASSISI NT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

S CTION OFFICER

To,

1 . The Principal^{Secretary, Revenue Department,Hyderabad '}

¶60

2.TheChiefCommissionerofLandAdministration,AbidsRoad,Hyderabad, T.G.

¶61

The District Collector,^{NalgondaDistrict,T'S.}

¶62

The Revenue Divisional^{Officer, Nalgonda Revenue Division,Nalgonda} District, T.S.

¶63

The Tahsildar, Nalgonda^{Mandal, Nalgonda District, T S'}

¶64

b. One CC to SRl. DR.^{KADIRE KRISHNAIAH Advocate} [OPUC]

¶65

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High^{Court for the Stateof Telangana} touTl

¶66

L Two CD Copies KKS BS

HIGH COURT

DATED:1911212024

ORDER

H L
(
o
14 F[8 ltrfr
ilt<br>{
U€
T C H €O

¶71

WP.No.35782 of 2024

¶72

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶73

/t/1

Chintapally Lakshmikanta v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chintapally Lakshmikanta 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

Sri Bagari Anjaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Rekala Ramdas Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Kasoju Uday Vs The State of Telangana

Poleboina Eswaramma, Vs The State of Telangana

Moghal Holdings Vs The State of Telangana

Parvathi Mallamma Vs The State of Telangana