Partly allowed

Shaik Chand v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Apr 2024WP/5602/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking direction to rectify land ownership entries and enter his name in Dharani records. Court directed respondents to process the application following natural justice.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 2nd respondent to consider online application, afford notice and opportunity to parties, pass appropriate orders within 8 weeks, and provide reasons for rejection if applicable.

Shaik Chand Vs The State of Telangana — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITIO NNO :5602OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Shaik Chand, S/o Late Mohammed Hussain, Aged about^{34 years,Occ.} Business, R/o. Kondakal Village, Shankarpally^{Mandal, Ranga Reddy District}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State ofTelangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary,^{Revenue Department,} Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District

¶13

The Tahsildar, Shankarpally Mandal,^{Ranga Reddy District.}

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that^{in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Court maybe} pleased to issue any Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAIVUS declaring the action of the Respondents in^not disposing the petitioner's Dharani applications bearing^{No.24OO0O6304and bearing} No.2400006307 daled. 23.02.2024 made for rectifying the wrong entriesⁱⁿ respect of the land to an extent ot Ac.6.27^gts in Sy.Nos. 334^{and 335 of} Kondalkal Village, Shankarpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy^District as^illegal, arbitrary and violation of artrcles 14,21 and 300-4 of^{Constitutionof lndia also} against the principles of natural^justice and consequently direct the^Respondents to rectify the same by entering the name of the^petitioner against the above^land lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶16

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 to act upon the dharani applications bearing No.2400006304 and bearing No.2400006307 dated: 23.02.2024 made by^the

¶17

I I

¶18

Petitioner^{for rectificationof the wrong entryin respect of the landto an extent} Ac.6.27^{gts in Sy.Nos334 and 335 of Kondalkal Village' ShankarpallyMandal'} Ranga Reddy^{District, pending disposalof main Writ Petition}

¶19

Counsel^{for the Petitioner: SRl. B' VIYASAGARREPSRIS' M' SAIFULLAH} Counsel forthe^{Respondents:SRI S' SRINIVASA} IED-DY' ASSISTANT^{GP FOR REVENUE}

¶20

The Court^{made the following:ORDER}

¶21

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.5602 OF 2024

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Heard Sri B. Vidyasagar, lcamed counsel, representing Sri S. M. Saifullah, Iearned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Srinivasa Reddy, learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for Revenue appearing fbr respondents

¶25

According to the petitioner, his grandfather late Mohammed Ghouse was the original owner and possessor of agricultuial land to an extcnt of Ac.6.27gunras in Sy.Nos.334 and 335 situated at Chevella, Kondakal Village, Shankaryalty Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. After his death, the petitioner has succeeded to the said properly. IJe has filed death certificate of his father. It shows that the date of death of his father is 09.08.2021. Except the said death certificate, the petitioner has not filed any document to show that his father and the petitioner are the absolute owners and possessors of the subject property. He has filed a copy of the sale deed bearing No. 1254 of 2007 dated, 14.012.2007 executed by Kandi Krishna represenred by his AGPA in favour of

¶26

¶27

K. Srikanth Reddy, in respect of land admeasuring 2l guntas in Sy.No.334. According to the petitioner he has submitted Online application ID No.30T7673OOOO3]43 dated 23.02.2024 with the 2nd respondent with a request to mutate his name and issue e_ pattadar passbook. Despite receiving and acknowledging the same, the 2nd respondent did not act upon it. Therefore, the present petition.

¶28

Whereas, Sri S.Srinivasa Reddy, learned Asst. Govt. Pleader, would contend that the petitioner herein has not filed a single document to show that his grandlather himself is the owner ofsubject property. However, 2nd respondent will considcr the said C)nline application strictly in accordance with lau,. 4. As discussed supra, though the petitioner crai,s tr.rat he is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property and he has not filed any documents including pahani and passbook and other relevant documents etc., issued in favour of his grandfather, his father and himself. Except death certificate of his father, he has not fi led any document. However, having received the said Online

¶29

¶30

application,2nd respondent should have considered it in accordance with law.

¶31

In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the Online Application vide ID No.30T767300003143 dated 23.02.2024 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law by putting the petitioner and all aflected parties on notice and affording then'r an opportunity. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner to file all relevant documents before the 2nd respondent. lf 2'd respondent is not inclined to accept the request made by the petitioner, he shall pass an order assigning specific reasons and communicate a copy of the said order to the petitioner. 2'd respondent shall complete the said exercise within a period of eight weeks from the date ol receipt of a copy of this

¶32

order.

¶33

As a sequel, pending miscellancous petitions, if any, shall also stand closed

¶34

SD/.MOHD. SANAULLAH ANSARI ASSISTANT REGIS-fRAR //TRUE COPY// g t SECTION OFFICER

¶35

To,

¶36

The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, T.S.,Hyderabad 2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District 3. The Tahsildar, Shankarpally lt/andal, Ranga Reddy District. 4. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 5. One CC to SRl. S. n/. SAIFULLAH, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies

BM ZBS x -.-

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 10412024

ORDER

WP.No.5602 of 2024

1tl EST4I€
q
or) 1 0 t\PR 2i2l
Pi!
./, i,1'
* -.c'1 .1. tll './
a- ' l'."-- ;/'
,.=t--)7'

¶44

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶45

ePi"

Shaik Chand v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Chand 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

Kadari Chandraiah Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Vasavi Old Age Home Charitable Trust, Vs The State of Telangana

Ponala Kankaiah Vs the State of Telangana

Aenkepally Premkumar Vs The State of Telangana

Ananthula Bharathamma Vs The State of Telangana

Chitikeri Chennaiah Vs The State of Telangana