Disposed

Ponuganti Raj Gopal Rao, Adilabad Dist. v. the Govt.of a.P.,Revenue,Hyd.,and 4 Otrs.

Telangana HC18 Mar 2025WP/11703/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, upon hearing a writ petition challenging the delay in concluding an enquiry regarding land title and cancellation of revenue entries, directed the Tahsildar to complete the enquiry and pass necessary orders within three months by issuing notices to all affected parties without adjudicating the merits of the title dispute.

What did the court decide?

The 3rd respondent (Tahsildar) directed to conclude the enquiry and pass necessary orders by issuing notices to affected parties within three months.

Ponuganti Raj Gopal Rao, Adilabad Dist. Vs the Govt.of… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^325s ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE EIQTJTEENTH DAY OF I/ARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 11703 OF 2014

¶8

Between:

¶9

Ponugantr Raj Gopal Rao, S/o. Bheem Rao, Age: 52 years, Occ: Business, R/o H.No.10-12, CCC Cross Road, lVancherial, Adilabad Dist-

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Revenue) Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, ltrlancherial, Adilabad Dist.

¶14

The Tahsildar, N/ancherial Mandal, Adilabad^Dist.

¶15

Nalmasu Gurucharanam S/o. Lachaiah, Occ Business R:/o D.No.lo-120,^Ivlain Road, I\ilancherial Village and lrilandal, Adilabad Dist. PIN-504209

¶16

Ranga Srisailam S/o Rajaiah, Occ Business^{Rl/o D.No. 10-120, Ivlain Road,} Mancherial Village and Mandal, Adilabad Dist. PIN-504209

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutton of lndia^praying that in^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 Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondenl in not concluding^the enquiry as ordered by the 3rd respondent in appeal order dt-30-9-2013 with^regard to the cancellation of pattadar^pass book and entries in the revenue records^vide proceedings dl-27-1o- 2002 issued in favour of the respondents 4 and 5 and not incorporating the^petitioners name in the revenue records in respect of the^{land an} extent of Ac.4-00 gts in Sy.NO.40/A and 40/AA situated at Naspur Village, Mancherial Mandei of Adilabad Dist, is illegal, atbilr'aty, and violative of^principles of natural^justice and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to complete^the enquiry within a reasonable time and incorporate the name of the^petitioner in the revenue records and issue patladar^pass books and title deed in^{his name.}

¶19

| 1 0F 2014 PMP. NO:14730OF 2014

¶20

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 3rd respondent to take immediate steps to complege the enquiry as ordered by the 2nd respondent in Appeal order dt.30-9-2013, pending clisposal of the Writ Petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.V.HANUMANTHA RAO Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI G.L.NAGESHWAR RAO

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶24

WRIT PETITION No.11703 of 20L4

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This writ petition 1S hled seeking the following

¶27

prayer:

¶28

"to declare the action of the 3,d respondent in not concluding the enquiry os ordered bg the 2"d respondent in appeal order dated 3O.O9.2O13 utith regard to the cancellation of pattadar pass book and enties in the reuenue records uide proceedings dated 27. 1O.2OO2 issued in fauour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 and not incorporating the petitioners name in the reuenue records in respect of the land an ertent of Ac.4.O0 gts., in Sy.Nos.4O/A and 4O/AA situated at Naspur Village, Mancherial Mandel of Adilabad Dtst is illegal arbitrary and uiolatiue of pinciples of natural . justice and consequentlg direct the 3d respondent to complete the enquiry tuithin a reasonable time and incorporate the name of the petitioner in the reuenue records and issue pattadar bass books and title deed in his name."

¶29

Heard Sri M.V. Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned- Additional

¶30

NVSK,J W.P.i\1). I l7O3 of 2014

¶31

¶32

Government Pleader for Revenue appe,aring for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri G.L. Nageshwar Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5 Perused the record.

¶33

Facts in brief are as follows:

¶34

Petitioner herein is claiming that he is tLLe absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.4-00 gts., 1n Sy.Nos.4O/A and 40IAA situated at Naspur Village, Mancherial Mandal of Adilabied District (for short, 'the subject land'), having purchased the same from its original owners and pattadars by way of Registered Sale Deed dated 23.09.2005. Therealter the petitioner obtained permission from Naspur Grampanchayat on 11.L2.2OO9 for construction of shed and a House number was allotted to the said premises as '5-37 /2 / ),1. Petitioner's further case is thar- he also obtained electricity connection to the said premrses.

¶35

NVSK,J W.P,No 117O3 of 20 14

¶36

It is further submitted that respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein without disclosing real facts have obtained pattadar pass book and incorporated their names in the revenue records vide proceedings dated 27.1O.2OO2 without any right or title over the subject property. When the petitioner came to know about the same, he hled an appeal before the 2"d respondent seeking cancellation of the said proceedings and the said appeal was allowed on 30.09.2O13 with the following observation:

¶37

"In the result the appeal is allowed. The arbitrarg proceedings No.55/ 2002 dt:27-10-2002 tuithout signature issued by the Manda Reuenue Officer, Mancherial is hereby Set-a-side and reminded back to the Tahsildar, Mancheial for fresh enqtiry. and, necessary action as per rules in force under ROR"."

¶38

It is further submitted that after remand the 3.d respondent has directed the Mandal Revenue Inspector and the Village Administrative Officer, Mancherial to conduct enquiry regarding the physical possession over

¶39

NVSK.J w P.:,lo.l I7O3 ol20I4

¶40

¶41

the subject land. In pursuance to the instn-rcr,ions of the 3.d respondent, the revenue authorities have conducted field verification on 19.02.2014 and recorded that the petitioner is in possession the property.

¶42

It is further submitted that even prior to the inspection the 3.d respondent has issued a notice dated 07.O1.2073 directing the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein to attend enquiry on 78.01.2014. Respondent No.3 herein had also issued simt.lar notices on 2l.Ol.2O 14 and 3O.OI.2O|4 hxing the date of enquiry, but till date no enquiry has been conducted.

¶43

It is further submitted that taking advantage of the situation respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein are creating problems and disturbances with regard to possession of the petitioner over the subject property. Though repeated requests were made by the petitioner to the 3.d respondent for completion of enquiry respondent No.3 is delaying the enquiry as ordered by respondcnl_ No.2 vide

¶44

NVSK,J W.P.No. t I7O3 of 2014

¶45

¶46

order dated 30.09.2013 and has not taken any steps for cancellation of proceedings dated 2Z.LO.2OO2 issued in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein, which is ex facie illegal. Questioning the same, petitioner hled the present Writ Petition.

¶47

This Court, on 17.04.2014 issued notices and also permitted the petitioner to serve personally on respondent Nos.4 and 5. Thereafter proof of service was hled on 19.O7.2074. Despite service of notice there is no response from respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶48

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the Revenue Divisional Ofhcer, Mancherial / respondent No.2 herein while allowing appeal on 30.09.2013 remanded the matter back to the Tahsildar, Mancherial / respondent No.3 for conducting of fresh enquiry and necessary action, no action has been initiated and the matter is still pending with respondent No.3 herein. Therefore, learned counsel for petitioner pray

¶49

NVSK,J W.P.llo.l 1703 of 2014

¶50

¶51

this Court to direct respondent No.3 to conclude the enqulry.

¶52

On a per-usal of the record, it is noticed that respondent No.2 has elaborately considered the appeal and allowed the same on 30.09.2013 rema:nding the matter to respondent No.3 herein directing the respondent to conduct fresh enquiry. Though aforesaid three (3) notices were issued by respondent No.3 herein by fixing the date of enquiry, however, resporrdent No.3 has not concluded the enquiry till date and it is still pending.

¶53

Learned Government pleader for Revenue, on instructions, would submit that respondent No.3 will conclude the enquiry and pass appropriate rtrders, 1n accordance with law.

¶54

L2. In view of the aforesaid submissions and without expresstng any merits of the case, this Writ tretition is

¶55

NVSK,.J W.P No.11703 o12014

¶56

¶57

disposed of directing the respondent No.3 to conclude the enquiry by issuing notices to all the affected parties and pass necessary orders, in accordance with law, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the petitioner cannot claim any equities of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶58

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shatl stand closed.

¶59

SD/.N. SRIHARI EPUTY REGISTRAR

¶60

//TRUE COPY//

¶61

SECTION^OFFICER

¶62

To rabad, Government^of 1. The Principal^{Secretary(Revenue) Secretariat,H} Telanoana. z iiJA'er"nr"^{DivisionalOfficer, Ivlancherial,Adilabad Dist'} 3. irie rintitoar,^It/ancherial 'r'l^{Mandal,AdilabadDist'} ; o;; bti; sRr V.HAr.tuwnNrHA^{RAo,AdvocateloPUQl-} d. i;; 6c; t"-cF^{Foa niveruuE,Highcourtfor the state or relansana'at} Hvderabad. [OUT'I 6 iiii"ct-t" sht c L.runcEswnR^{RAo,Advocate [oPUC]} 7 Two CD Copies PSK.

GJP Y1-

HlGH COURT

DATED:1810312025

ORDER

WP.No.11703 of 2014

Ie
'f
q
c)
02 i{il
o
lr DE

¶69

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶70

*ta
\o Lo
F5
k,

Ponuganti Raj Gopal Rao, Adilabad Dist. v. the Govt.of a.P.,Revenue,Hyd.,and 4 Otrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ponuganti Raj Gopal Rao, Adilabad Dist. v. the Govt.of a.P.,Revenue,Hyd.,and 4 Otrs.

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

Nimmaneni Shyamala Vs The State of Telangana

Aero Wings Travel and Cargo Agency Vs Union of India, rep by the Secretary to Government

Y.Hanmandlu, Vs The Joint Director of Census Operation

Smt.K.Ramachandramma,Hyd Vs Union of India,Home,Under Scy,New Delhi,Andanot

Vemula Srinivas Vs Union of India

Vummareddy Jyothi Vs State of Telangana