Disposed

Smt. Dargupally Pentamma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Apr 2024WP/8736/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a mandamus directing revenue authorities to rectify land record entries wrongly showing 'Laoni Patta' instead of 'Patta'. The Court noted the absence of proof of representation submission and directed the petitioner to file an online application under CCLA's Circular No.1/2021, with the Tahsildar to pass a reasoned order within eight weeks after notice and hearing.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to submit online application under CCLA Circular No.1/2021 within 10 days; Tahsildar to pass reasoned orders within 8 weeks after hearing.

Smt. Dargupally Pentamma Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

I3168 I

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITI ON NO:8736 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Dargupally Pentamma, Mo Late D.Raieshwar, aoed about 60 vears. occ. Household, ilo Flal !q. _1_01! Varsha^-Apartmbnt- Nearest Sgl 'B;i, Puppalaguda, Manikonda, R.R.District.

¶9

...PET|T|ONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 . The State of. Telangana, rep. By its principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. Konoarakalan

¶13

The Tahsildar, Serilingampblly Mandat, R R.Distri-ct

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the inaction of the respondent authorities in taking steps to rectify the entries in the revenue records including the Dharani portal in respect of the land in Sy.No.^.124lRU adrn€asuring ac. 1O.OO gts, situated at Gopanpally village, Serilingampally Mandal, R.R.District by deleting the word Laoni Patta from the column Category of Land/Cist and to enter as pafta, inspite of the personal visits, followed by written representation dt. 2-1-2024 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and @nsequenfly direct the respondent authorities to rectify the said entries by considering the representation dl. 2-1-2024 and take appropriate action as per Law.

¶16

lA NO: { OF 2024

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affklavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct

¶18

the Respondent authorities^{not to dispossessor in any manner interferewith the} possession and enjoyment of the^petitionerin respect^{of the land in Sy.No.124lRU} admeasuring ac.^{10.00gts, situated at Gopanpally village, SerilingampallyMandal,} R.R.District,^{pending disposal of the mainWritPetition.}

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:^SRI BOLLU^NAGARA"TU Counsel for the Respondents: AGP^{FOR REVENUE}

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE I( LAKSHMAN

¶22

WRITPETITI ON No.8 736 of2024

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

' Heard leamed counsel for the petitioners and Sri Srinivas

¶25

Reddy, learned Assistant Govemment pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents.

¶26

According to the petitioner, her father_in_law i.e., late Sri Durgampally Veeraiah, has purchased the land admeasuring Ac.25.00 gts., in Sy.Nos.7ll1, 7412 and, 12416 situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, under a registered sale deed dated 18.01.1953. But it appears that it is an unregistered sale deed. Her father-in-law died on 25.05.1972. Even her husband died on 09.02.2010. According to the petitioner, her father-in-law's name is recorded in the revenue records, but it is wrongly recorded as^..Laoni Patta" instead of "Patta tznd". Therefore, she submitted representation dated 02.01.2024 with respondent No.3 with a request to rectifr the wrong entry as 'Patta Land' instead of^.Laoni patta'. Respondent No.3 is not acting on the said representation. Therefore,

¶27

the present Writ Petition

¶28

¶29

[rarned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions from respondent No.3 would submit that according to respondent No.3, the land in Sy.No.l24 to an extent of Ac.279.38 situated at Gopanpally Village is recorded as "poramboke Sarkari" and mentioned in prohibitory list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act. A copy of said written instructions was placed on record.

¶30

As discussed supra, though the petitioner is claiming that her father-inJaw purchased the subject land under registered sale deed dated 18.01.1953, he has not taken steps during his lifetime. Even her husband did not take any steps during his lifetime. She has submitted representation only on 02.01.2024, but there is no acknowledgment in proof of submission of the said rqrresentation with respondent No.3. Except a copy of the aforesaid sale deed, she has not filed any other documents. However, if she seeks rectification of entries, she has to submit online application in terms of CCLA's Circular No.l/2021, dated t5-0t-2021.

¶31

In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this Writ petition is disposed off granting liberty to the petitioner to make online application with respondent No.3 in temrs of the aforesaid circular along with all relevant documents within l0 days from the date of

¶32

¶33

receipt of copy of this order. On receipt of the said online application, respondent No.3 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law by putting the petitioner on notice and affording her an opportunity of hearing. If, respondent No.3 is not inclined to accept the request made by the petitioner, he shall assign reasons and pass a reasoned order. He shall communicate the said order to the petitioner and he shall complete the entire exercise within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of said online application.

¶34

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

¶35

this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶36

sd/- P. cH. NAGABHUSHAMB ASSISTAN GI

¶37

//TRUE COPY// sEcflo OFFICER

¶38

To 1. The Principal Secretary'^{Revenue Department,Secretariat' Hyderabad' State} of Telanoana.

¶39

1. Ranga Reddy^{District, Kongarakalan} 3. iil i't "6lii'riii'dortector, i;ii;ihr,1 se'ili^{n'samp-allvMaridal,R. R. District} - - 4. cj"l b?iii s ilt^{-eo L-iitlAcAnruu, Ad,vocqtgtoP u91} . 5. i,),lI 6E"i.-c'i-r6n^{neven0E. nibn court fd the stare of Telangana, at} Hyderabad. [OUTI

¶40

1. Two CD Copies

¶41

PSK.

HIGH COURT

KL,J

DATED:0310412024

ORDER

WP.No.8736 of 2024

l ttE STAI€
( )
q
/.)3 20 APR 2U24
n
*
I
D
F-epATCH c0

¶48

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶49

Smt. Dargupally Pentamma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Dargupally Pentamma 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

Shaik Khabeer Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Imran Vs Dasari Balaiah

Kommidi Thirupathi Reddy Vs The state of Telangana

D.Muralidhar Reddy Vs D.Srinivas Reddy

Rathlavath Raju Vs The State of Telangana

K. Venkat Reddy Vs Sri G Madhu