Sada Narasamma Vs State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying thatⁱⁿ the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF TMANDAMUS declaring the action of Respondent No.2^{in passingorders} vide procgs No. D171212024lYEDAPALLYIIM-33/C-4 dated 30-06-2024^{upon the} online application made by the^petitioner requesting to^{transfer of the petitioners} land from Notional khata (All types) to^patta in Sy. No.^788/ij ,^{Ext - Ac. 0 05 gts} situated at Jankampet (V), Yedapally^{(M) under option TM 33 VIDEonline} Application no 2300147105 dated^{2610912023for deletion of land situated in} Jankamapet village and mandal^{extent of Ac 0.05 gnts in the POBlist on the} ground of pendency of irrelevant Civil suit for^{perpetual injection filed by the Third}

¶17

(

¶18

/;

¶19

party vide 0.S No - 189 of 2022 on the file of Hon'ble Jr. Civil judge at Bodhan and the schedule property in the suit is survey no 788/ i ra extent of 0.26 gnts at Jankampet (v), Yedapally (M), Nizamabad (Dist) duty purctrased by plaintiff from Mangari Pochaiah under sada paper in the may 2007 and survey no Zggtl a an extent of 0.38 gnts at Jankampet (v), Yedapally (M), Nizamabad (Dist) duty purchased by Plaintiff frorn Nakka qayanna under sada paper in the may 2007 and the suit is filed agarnst the respondents in which the pr:titioner is nol a pa(y, is illegal arbitrary violative of principle of natural justicg and also against Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300 A of Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent no 2 far deletion of the petitioners land iq survey no 7gg/i pl<t - [q. 0.05^gts situated at Jankampet (V),^yedapa[y (M) from the crohibitory prgperties.

¶20

|.A.NO:1 OF 2025

¶21

Petition Under Section 15'l cpc praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High coLrrt may- bg pleased tp suspend the rejection order passed by the Respondent trlo.2 in passing orders vide prgcgq \o. Dt7 12/2024/YEDAPALLYfiM-331C-4 dated 30-06-2024 pending disposal of thp main writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner : M/s P.LALITHA KAMESH

¶23

Counsel for lhe Respondents: AGp FOR REVENUE

¶24

The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER

ll

I I i

iI i

I

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR R"EDDY

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.l1330 of2o25

¶31

ORDER

¶32

This Writ Petition is fited qucstioning the proceedings No.D / 7 12 I 2024 I YDD AP LLLY I TM-33 I C-4, dated 30.06.2024 issued by the respondent No.2 in not changing the classihcation of the land in Sy.No.788/ 1j to an extent of Ac.0.05 gts situated at Janakampet Village, Yedapally Mandal, from notional katha to patta land as illegal, arbitrary and for other appropriate relie [s.

¶33

It is stated that thc petitioncr is the absolute ou,r'rer and possessor of thc land admcasuring Ac.0.O5 guntas in Sy.No.788/ 1j, situatcd at Janakeimpet Village, Yedapally Mandal, having been assigncd uide D-Form Patta in proceedings No.B/ 153/2008, datcd 22.O1.2OO8, and pattadar passbooks and titlc decds ncre issued vide Khata No.1O68. It is further statcd that pctitioner has applied for transfer of subjcct land from notionaLl khata to patta land uide application No-23O0 147105 dated 25.09.2O23 in the prescribed proforma in Dharani PorLal. It is also stated that the respondent No.2 District Collector after calling lor report and after verification of thc revenue rccords, has rejected the application submitted by

./ ,/ l./

.4 *,

2

the petitioner on the ground that a suit vide O.S.No.18 9 of 2022 is pending on the file of the Civil Jucigc, Bodharr, against the son of the pctitioner and olhers but not on the gr,runrl that the petitioner tvas not assigned the land and there is a manipulation of the record. It is further sta I ed that the respondent No.3 was directccl to include the subjcr:t land in the Notional Khata. It is stated that third parties who :r -e noL having right or title over the subject property and no suit u as rr_rstituted against the pctitioner and even ir any suii is rnstituted, the same would not have any bcaring on the applicatlon submitted by the petitioner for transfer of thc tand from Notrolal l(hata to patta land as land was assigned to the petitioner by lollowing due process of lar.l,.

¶38

Considered thc submissions of the learncd counscl Ibr thc respective parties zrnd with their consent, this wrir petition is being disposed of at the admission stage.

¶39

4' A careful reading o[ Lhc impugned order rvourd revea] that except stating that a civil suit is pending, responrlcnt No.2_ District Collector has not taken into considcration ta I thcre are no prohibitory orders rvhatsoevcr over the suit schedule property either for mutatjon or consequent.ial amcndnLer_rt of the

3

I

I I

revenue records. It is settled larv that mere pendency of the suit/ case before any forum, does not disentitle the authority to exercise its statutory functions and more particularly in the absence of any restraint order by thc competent civil Court. The authority ought to have examined the case of the petitioncr basing on the D-form patta certificate issued vide proceedings uide R.D.S No B/ 153/2008, daLed 22.O1.2OO8. If the petitioner has violated any of thc conditions stipulated in final patta certificate issued in tcrms of the policy laid down in G.O.Ms.No_ 1406 datcd 25.07.19S9, the respondcnt authorities are having power to initiate appropriatc action but they are not having any right to withhold the patta passbooks. It is settled law that in the absence of any prohibitory order, the respondent authorities cannot deny issuance o[ pattadar passbook or for the conversion of land from notional khata to patta land to enjoy the absolute rights and to receive various incentives sanctioned by the Government from time to time. Therefore, the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 is not in accordance with the provisions of the ROR Act or as per the provisions of the Bhu Bharathi Act (Act I of 2O2S) and the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶44

4

¶45

In view ol the above, the orders passed by respondent No.2 uide proceedings N o.D / 7 12 I 2024 / ytrD Ap ALIJ/TM_33 / C_ 4, dated 30.06.2024 is set aside. The respor-rdenL No.2 is directed to re-examine the application sLlbnlittecl by the petitioner afresh, as the subjecl land is assip;ned land, for issuance of passbooks and incorporation of the entries under the provisions of Bhu Bharathi Act and thc Rules made thereunder, within a period of eight (g) u,ecks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, i[ there is no restraint order over the subject property issued by the competent Cour-t.

¶46