Dismissed

Kotla Devender Rao v. The State of Telangana and 8 others

Telangana HC22 Nov 2024WP/6822/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with liberty to avail statutory remedies. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing revenue officials to rectify entries and issue a Digital Title Deed on Sy. No. 151/E.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail other remedies; the petition dismissed as withdrawn.

Kotla Devender Rao Vs The State of Telangana and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³²⁹⁶ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT.FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND^{DAYOF NOVEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{C.V. BHASKAR REDDY}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:6822OF²⁰²³

¶7

Between:

¶8

Kotla Devender Rao,^S/o Hanmanth Rao or Anantha^{Rao Aged about61} years, Occ. Agriculture, Rlio Tippareddypalli^{Village, VangoorMandal,} Nagarkurnool District

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana ,^{Rep. by Principal Secretary,Revenue Department'} T.S. Secretariat, BRKR Bhavan,^Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector,^{NagarkurnoolDistrict.}

¶13

The District Panchayat^{Officer, Nagarkurnool District}

¶14

+. fne District town^an-d Country^{Planning Officer, NagarkumoolDistrict} d: iil Mild;iFiristrao^{Development 6fficer,Vangbortvlandal, Nagarkurnool} District.

¶15

The Tahsildar, Vangoor The Tahsildar, Vangoor^{Mandal, Nagarkurnool District}

¶16

The Tahsildar, Vangoor The Tahsildar, Vangoor^{Mandal, Nagarkurnool District} 7. iil S;b-RasisGr] Stamps^{ind -RegistrationDepartment,Kalwakurthy,} Nagarkurnool District.

¶17

a f[E Fi"Cnitai seCretary,^{Tippareddypalli Grampanchayat,Vangoor Mandal,} Nargarkurnool District.

¶18

s. ihe"venkatadri Township,^{rep. by its Managing Partner. M.Ambachary, O/o'}

¶19

rippareoovpJtii vitt"ge, VaniooiMandal , Nag-arkurnool District' R/o'19-105, fiWat<urttry fown^{an-d Mandal, NagarkunroolDistrict.}

¶20

...RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition under Article²²⁶ ol^{the constitution of lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be} pleased to issue a writ, order or^{direction, more particularlyone in the nature of} wRlT OF MANDAMUS,^{declare the action of the Respondents No.2and 6, in not} rectifying wrong entries^{in the nameof unofficial respondent No.9 in revenue} records and not consider^{the online Application No. 2200439555 dated 28-04-} 2022 of the^{petitioner in respectof in sy.No.151/Eto an extent of Ac.1-29 gts.,} situated at Tippareddypalli^{Village, Vangoor Mandal,NagarkurnolDistrict} updating the same^{to the Dharani Portal and issuing the DigitalTitleDeedto that}

¶22

effect and rejected the same without ascertain any reasons, as i egal, arbitiary, unjust, violate of principles of natural justice, violate of Articles .14, 21 and 300'A of the constitution of tndia and consequentially direct the respondents No.6 and 7 not to create any third party alienations regarding the petitioners land

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶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.6 and 7 not to create any third party arienations regarding the petitioners rand in Sy.No.151/E to an extent of Ac.i-29 gts., situated at rippareddypaili viilage, Vangoor Mandar, Nagarkurnor District

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. M. RAMESHWAR RAO

¶26

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 1,2&6: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3to5: cp FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶28

counsel for the Respondent No.7: Gp FoR srAMps AND REGrsrRATroN Counsel for the Respondent No.8: SRI R. CHANDRA SHEKAR REDDY, SC Counsel for the Respondent No.9: -

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶30

,i,.,

¶31

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

¶32

trIRIT PETITION NO.6822 of 2o.23

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner has addressed a letter dated 21.11.2024 to the Registry seeking permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition with a liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies available in law.

¶35

Permission as sought for is accorded.

¶36

Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. No costs

¶37

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition

¶38

shall stand dismissed

¶39

SD/-S. MALLIKARJUNA BAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// s/ SECTION OFFICER

¶40

To,

¶41

One CC to SRl. M.^{RAMESHWARRAO,Advocate[OPUCI} - 2. i; ccdi"-cC Fbn^nEveruue ,High^{court for the Stateof Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUTI

¶42

i;;-cd" t'-cC i'on srnups^{AND REGlsrRArloN, Hish court for the} State ofTelangana,^{at Hyderabad} [ggTJ

¶43

i*d cc. io el; ron^{pArrrdnAvntRAiAND RURAL DEVELoPMENTHish} Court for the State^{of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OU-TI} -

¶44

o"" dc't6 snil^{n. cnnr.ro"na snexAnREDDY,sc FoRGRAM} PANCHAYAT [OPUC]

¶45

Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:2211112024

2..J$ ;tre Sl'4rs
:g
-' 10 [il] ?92{ a
L
:. ,)
I
.\lr'--:s D/. i C{EO t

¶52

ORDER

¶53

WP.No.6822 of 2023

¶54

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

¶55

¶56

7,o *l

Kotla Devender Rao v. The State of Telangana and 8 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotla Devender Rao v. The State of Telangana and 8 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nallaparaju Gopala Raju Vs State of Telangana

P. Vivekananda Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others

Bantu Sudhakar Vs The State of Telangana

Pallepati Satyanarayana, Vs Sri. Navin Mittal

Pallepati Satyanarayana Vs Sri. Navin Mittal

Y. Prakash Reddy Vs The State of Telangana