Disposed

Chada Sudhakar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Apr 2025WP/10568/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition over uncorrected revenue record entries for small agricultural land holdings in Karimnagar District. The court directed respondents to examine the petitioner's pending correction application and pass a reasoned order within two months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to examine application No.240086366 dated 24.08.2024 and issue a reasoned order on record correction within two months; no costs.

Chada Sudhakar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^32e6 I

¶2

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE^{EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTYFIVE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICEC.V.BHA,SKAR REDDY}

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 10568^{0F 2025}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Chada Sudhakar Reddy,^{S/o Narsimha Reddy Aged About 45 Years Occ'} IsrJ;ltr-; R/"^{H |tiol' z-il'o)a- SrrvanJgdr,hoad No 7' Karimnasar} Tetangana State

¶10

...pETlIoNER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana,^{rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department'} Telangana Secretariat.^Hyderabad

¶13

Z ifre O,"strict bollector.^{Kaiimnagar District, Karimnagar Telanganastate.} 3 The Tahsildar,^{Gangadhara Mandal, Karimnagar Distrrctlul?!qq']?} :-t?"^,.,^ 4 Veloula^padma, w6 Mallaiah^{Aged about 45 years. Occup€tlonrjousevvlTe} ' ni;'ti;;;rrttiivara rvl Gansadhara Mandal-Karimnagar District

¶14

5 iil"r;iJ,3fi"'b'rirlWdiihs"^{n"eatv ng;;dioout47 vea} -Kar mnasa^{is occupitionHouse} J^District

¶15

" fiir; Hi"-u ;;;;; rviurvri"iVl,' G#sadhara Mandal a eJama viijva Lakshriri, bio^{Anant6aReddyAgedabout43 yearsoccupation} " il;;;Vii?;'ilo poinrqrntipali (V) Gangabha-ra Mandal Karinrnasar Drstrict z EiJru'r,rruila Reddy,^{s"to Nbrsaibr,} {ged-auout^{6p. Years} ,^{occuq?!91^,} .-,^. Agriculture R/o^{Pothugantipalli(V), Gangadhara Mandal Karrmnagar urstrrcl}

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under^{Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances^{statedin the affidavitfiled therewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue a Writ, Order^{or Direction more particularlyonein the nature of} writ of Mandamus, declaring^{the in actionof 3rd respondentin not correcting of} petitioner names in the Revenue^{Records pertaining to petitioners lands i.e.} SurveyNo.g33tEtBllanextentofAc.0.0lgunta.SurveyNo.933/E/B/2anextent of Ac. 0.0'1^{gunta. Survey No. 1/E/B an extent of Ac 0'05 guntasSurveyNo'} llElAl2 an extent of^{Ac. 0.03guntas. survey No. 866l2lAlct1an extent of Ac. 0 06} guntas. survey No. 866/2/A/C/2^{an extent of Ac. 0.06 guntas.Total extent (EQUAL} TO) Ac. 0.26^{guntas, situated Uppar Malyala Village, Gangadhara Mandal'} Karimnagar^{District T.G. as illegal,improper,arbitrary and unconstitutiona I and}

l, F t:

i l,

against the principles of natural justice consequently direct the 3rd respondent to correction of Petitioner name in the concerned Revenue Records pertaining to above said lands.

¶22

IA NO: oF2 25

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court'may be pleased to direct the 3rd respondent to correction of Petitiqner name^pertaining to i.e. Survey No, 933lElBl1 an extent of Ac. 0.01 gunta. Survey No. 933/E/B/2 an exlent of Ac. 0.01 gunta. $urvey No, 1iElB an extent of Ac. 0.05 guntas. Survev Ng. 1/E/A/2 an extent of Ac. 0.03 guntas. Survey No. B66l2lNCl1 an extenl of Ac, 0.06^guntas. Survey No. 8O6l2lAlCl2 an extenl of Ac. 0.Q6 guntas. Tolal extgnt = Ac. 0.26 guntas, situated Uppar Malyala Village, Gangadhara Mandal, Karimnagar District T.G. in the concerned Revenue Records, fodhwith^pending dispoqal of the above writ petition.

¶24

Counsel for thp Petitioner: SRI SATYANARAYANA DHARMAPUBI Counsel for tfue Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: SRI L.RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 TO 7: --

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.1O568 of 2o25

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of {he Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relieft

¶31

"....to issue a Wit, Order or Direction more partianlarly one in the nature of Wnt of Mandamus declaing the in action of 3,a respondent in not correcting of petitioner names in the Reuenue Records pertaining to petitioner's lands i.e. Surueg No.933/ E/ B/ I on extent of Ac.O.O1 guntas Suruey No.933/E/B/2 an extent of 4c.0.01 guntas Surueg No.1/E/B an ertent of Ac.O.OS guntas Suruey No.1/ E/ A/ 2 an extent of Ac.0.03 gunto.s Surueg No.866/2/A/C/ 1 an ertent of Ac.0.O6 WntcLS Surueg No.66/ 2/ A/ C/ 2 an extent of Ac.0.06 guntas Total extent EeUAL TO Ac.0.26 guntas situoted tJppar Malgalo Village, Gangadlnra Mandal, Korimnagar District, TG as illegal, improper, arbitrary and unconstttutional and agalnst the pinciples of nahral justice consequentlg direct the 3,a respondent to correction of petitioner name in the concem-ed. Reuenue Records pertaining to aboue said. lands...."

¶32

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government pleader appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and perlrsed the record.

¶33

The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of land to an extent of Ac.0.01 guntas in Survey No.933/E/B/ 1, an extent of Ac.O.01 guntas in Survey No.933/E/B/2, an extent of Ac.O.05 guntas in Survey No. 1/E/B, an extent of Ac.O.OS guntas in Survey No.l /E / A/2, an extent of Ac.O.O6 guntas in Survey

¶34

¶35

No.B66/2lAlCl1, an extent of^{Ac.O.O6guntas} in^Survey No.66l2lAlCl2, in total admeasuring^{Ac.O.26 guntas, situated at} Uppar Maiyala Village, Gangadhara Mandal, Karimnagar^District, having acquired the same from his ancestors. ..lt is^{furtherstated} that the names of their predecessors-in-interest^{were recorded in} the revenue records and the revenue authorities have mutated^their names in the revenue records and also issued^{pattadarpassbooks} vide passbook No.25370 and Khata No.887 in their favour. It^is further stated that while updating the entries in the^revenue records, when certain extent of lands are missing in^{the Dharani} Portal, he submitted an application vide No.24OO086366^dated 24.08.2024 for correcting the said entries, and even^{after lapse of} more than six months, the respondent authorities are^not considering the same, to enable him to receive various incentives as investment subsidies sanctioned by the Government under various schemes for cultivation of the 1ands. Hence, this writ^petition.

¶36

In vieu, of the above, since it is stated that the^pctitioner has already submitted application for correction of the entries,^this Court is of the opinion that ends of^justice would be met if the respondents are directed to examine the application vide No.24OOO86366 dated 24.08.2024 submitted by the petitioner. If it is found that the petitioner satisfies all the requirements for

¶37

¶38

kt ;\F' n: I ! tl

¶39

h I i '8.t F F tl.Grt t I i.I

¶40

correction of the entries, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the same and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶41

With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed ol No order as to costs

¶42

As a sequel, the miscellaleous petitions pending, if any, shail

¶43

stand closed -

¶44

SD/- K. BHAVANI^SWAMY ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

//TRUE coPY/'

,EcrtoN^oFFlcER

1 The Principal^{Secretary Revenue Department' Telangana Secretariat'} Hvderabad,^{State of Telangana.} 2 Tt;;,.fi;i do'ir""ior,^{Xariilnagar District, Karimnagar Telanganastate.} 3 +ffi f;"tilil ;;^{b"i"-eirar,r j i, rt r-Jno a t. kaii m na gjlr D i6trict Tel a ns a l? .*3te} 4 o"".,btiiisnrsAf^{iANnnnvA-r'rA'oHAnunlpuR!'AdvocateloPUCl} Yffi ;;r;""6'ilon^{nEVrr'luE,Higlr court for the state of relangana' at} Hyderabad [OUT] o Two CD^CoPies

o PSK.

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:0810412025

ORDER

WP.No.10568 of²⁰²⁵

o 1i:14 c
/,,,'<!/
//
q? *&
trJ
a
s s ((.i
5 {cJ
;!
t<br>
J Hot

¶57

DISPOSING OF THE^{WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS

¶58

@
<br>

Chada Sudhakar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chada Sudhakar 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

Smt. Kudumula Jayanthi Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. Kotapati Koteswara Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Chintala Venkata Narayana Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Venkateswara Developers Vs The State of Telangana

Keesari Anji Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Bejjanki Bhaskar And Another Vs The State of Telangana And Another