Dismissed

Kommidi Thirupathi Reddy v. The state of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Apr 2024WP/6291/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition wherein the petitioner sought protection against revenue authorities threatening to cancel his pattadar passbook. The court directed the authorities not to threaten cancellation or initiate proceedings without following due procedure while the underlying dispute remains pending.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 2 and 3 not to threaten the petitioner for cancellation of pattadar passbooks without following due procedure under law.

Kommidi Thirupathi Reddy Vs The state of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

I^316a !

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF^APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^K.LAKSHMAN

¶7

WRIT PETITI ON NO: 6291 OF²⁰²⁴

¶8

Between

¶9

Kommidi Thirupathi Reddy, S/o Narsinha^{Reddy, aged about70 years,Occ.} Agriculture, Ryd Elakathurthy^{Village, and Mandal,KarimnagarDistrict}

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The state of Telangana, rep by its,^{Prl Secretary for Revenue Department,} Secretariate, Builiding, Saifafabad,^Hyderabad

¶13

a The District Collector, Hanmakonda^District

¶14

3 Tahsildar, Elakathurthy, Elakathurthy^{Mandal, HanmakondaDrstrtict}

¶15

4 Kommidi Linga Reddy, S/o Raghava^{Reddy,aged about 60 yearsrocc} Agriculture, R/o Elakathurthy,Presently^{Residingat H.No 3-9-44,Reddy} Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal^District.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of^{the Constitutbnof lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filedtherewith, the High courtmay be pleased} to issue any writ order or direction^{more particularlyone in the nature of wrrt of} Mandamus declaring the action^{of the respondent No.3 threatening the Petitionerto} cancel the^{pattadar pass} book on^{instigation Respondent.No4in respectof sy.No} 117tD, 76tB adnreasuring Ac0-26^gts and^{Ac 0-15 112 is arbitrary illegaland} viotation order^passed in E3/ Spl.Tribunall^{81612O21d112.o7-2021by the Special} Tribunal warangal urban District and^{article 300-AConstitution of india and} consequantly direct the Respondents^{No 3 not to cancelthe pattadarpass book in} respect of Sy.no .1 171D, 76tB admeasuring Ac 0-26 gts and Ac 0.15 1/2 gts Total an extent of Ac 1-01^{percentgts situatedat Elkathu(hyvillageandNlandal,} Hanmakonda District by implementing the^{order passed rnPro No} E3/Spt/tribunal t816t2021 dated 12.07.2021^{by the specialTribunal warangal} Urban

¶18

!A NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of^{the petition, the High court maybe pleased to direct} the Respondent.No3 not cancel^{the pattadarpass book and title deedpending} disposal of the writ^petition

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRl.V SRIKANTHA RAO}

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.1to 3: SRl. S. SRINIVASA REDDY AGP FOR}

¶22

REVENUE

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.4: None appeared}

¶24

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶25

¶26

l t

¶27

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^K.LAKSHMAN

¶28

WRIT PETITIO^N No.6291^{OF 2024}

¶29

ORDER:-

¶30

Heard Mr.V.Srikantha Rao,^{Iearned counsellorthe}

¶31

petitioner and Sri S.Srinivasa^{Reddy,learnedAsst'Govt'Pleaderfor} Revenue. In^view of^{the relief sought by the petitioner, notice to}

¶32

4tr' respondent is dispensed^with.

¶33

The petitioner herein^{is the absolute ownerand possessor} of the land adrneasuring^{Ac.0.1500in Sy'No.58/D2,Ac 0 l550 in} Sy'.No.7618/2, Ac 0.0250^{inSy.No'1l6lBl1,Ac'O 2600 in} Sy.No. I 17/D12, Ac.0.0350^{inSy.No.158/C/1,Ac'0 0250 in} Sy'No. 175't]11^{and Ac.0. ll00 in Sy.No.l75lClin total Ac'l'3600} situated at Iikathufthi Village^{and Mandal, Warangal Urbarr} District- In prool of the^{same,he has filed graduatepassbook} issued b1 3'd respondent.^{However, thereis referencewith regald} to the suits vide O.S.No.272^{of 2005, A'S.No.3of 20 l3 and} S.A.No.l76 of 20t4 in^{the affidavit filed by the petitioner along} r ith thc prcscnt u'rit petition. There^{is also referenceto tht: ot'dcr} clatcd 11.07.1021^passed by^{Special Tribunal,Warangal ['rban} t)istrict. :ide rhe said order dated^{12.07.2021, leamedSpecial}

¶34

)

¶35

Tribunal held that when rhe marter is sub judice in S.A.No.276 of 2014 before this Court, it is not proper ro decide the issue. Even then, according to the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 are going to cancel the paftadar passbooks issued in his favour. Therefore, the present writ ltetition

¶36

Wher.eas, Iearned Asst. Govt. pleader fbr Revenue, on instructions, would submit rhar the respondenrs 2 and 3 will strictly follow the procedure laid do*.n under law on receipt of any complaint for cancellation ofpassbooks olthe petitroner herein.

¶37

Considering the albrcsaid paftadar passbooks issued in favour of the peririoncr. and submission of learned Asst.Govt.pleader. this ,,,, rit pcririon is disposed of.directing the respondents 2 and 3 not ro thrcaten the petitioner herein for cancellation ol'partadar passbooks issucd in his tavour, without following due procedure Iaid dorr n undcr lau,.

¶38

As a sequel thereto. pending rniscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶39

SD/. K. VENKAI ASSISTANT REGIST R //TRUE COPY//

¶40

SECTION OFFICER

¶41

To,

¶42

'1 . The Pd Secreta_ry for Revenue Department, Secretariate, Builiding, state of Telangana. Saifafabad. Hyderabarl

¶43

The Dtstrict Collector, Hannrakonda District

¶44

The Tahsildar, Elakathurthy, Elakathu.thy IVandal, Hanmakonda Distrtict

¶45

One CC to SRt. V SRTKANTHA RAO Advocate tOpUCl

¶46

t I

¶47

5 Two CCs to SRl. S. SRINIVASA^{REDDYAGP FOR REVENUE'HighCourt} for the State of Telangana^{at Hyderabad} [OUT]

¶48

b Two CD Copies KKS GJP

I t HIGH COURT

DATED:0210412024

tA
,t
) (
{
D t h|, 202.4
a)
o,+

¶53

ORDER

¶54

WP.No.6291 of 2024

¶55

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

¶56

Kommidi Thirupathi Reddy v. The state of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kommidi Thirupathi Reddy 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

Mohammed Afzal Vs The State of Telangana

Chinthakindi Ram Chander Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Chand Vs The State of Telangana

Ratnavath Kamalnath Singh Vs The State of Telangana

Lakkakula Chinna Narsaiah Vs State of Telangana

Begum Vs The State of Telangana