Dismissed¶28

Smt. G.Vimalamma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC22 Apr 2025WP/11879/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of writ petition with liberty; pattadar pass book and title deed cancellation; Telangana revenue records enquiry; Sy.Nos. 486, 483, 484, 480, 479, 478, 520, Chinnakaparthy village, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District; representation dated 15-3-2025; inaction of Tahsildar/RDO/District Collector; bar on refiling writ on same cause of action; Section 151 CPC application; Article 226 mandamus; dismissed as withdrawn without costs; Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy; Telangana High Court; 22 April 2025.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail the remedies as available under law; the petitioner is barred from filing any future writ petition before this Court on the same cause of action; no costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed. ¶28

Smt. G.Vimalamma Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the inaction of the respondent authorities in conducting enquiry and cancelling the pattadar pass book and title deed issued in favour of the 5th respondent, despite the petitioner's written representation dated 15-3-2025 followed by personal visits, was illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional, and whether the authorities should be directed to conduct the enquiry and cancel the said documents.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail the remedies as available under law, and the Court accorded that permission.

¶26

Key takeaways

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, granting the liberty as prayed for.ratio¶28
It is made clear that on the same set of cause of action the petitioner is not entitled to file any writ petition in future before this Court.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Single Bench, C.V. Bhaskar Reddy, J.), Writ Petition No. 11879 of 2025, decided 22-04-2025: The petitioner, claiming land in Sy.Nos. 486, 483, 484, 480, 479, 478 and 520 at Chinnakaparthy village, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District, had sought a writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the revenue authorities (State of Telangana, District Collector, RDO and Tahsildar, Nalgonda) in conducting enquiry and cancelling the pattadar pass book and title deed issued in favour of the 5th respondent, despite her written representation dated 15-3-2025 followed by personal visits, and consequential directions to cancel those documents. An interlocutory application under Section 151 CPC sought interim consideration of the representation. On the date of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail remedies available under law; permission was accorded. The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with that liberty, without costs, with an express clarification that on the same set of cause of action the petitioner is not entitled to file any further writ petition before this Court. Pending miscellaneous petitions were closed.

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 11879 OF 2425

¶6

Between:

¶7

Smt. G.Vimalamma, d/o Bitla lVlallaiah, aged about^years, occ. Housewife, r/o Chinnakaparthy village, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶11

The District Collector, Nalgonda District, At Nalgonda.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda Revenue Division, Nalgonda District

¶13

The Tahsildar,, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District

¶14

Gutha Malla Reddy, s/o Veera Reddy, aged about 54^years, occ. Business, r/o H.No.5-11-164, Shanthi Nagar, Nalgonda (Urban) Nalgonda District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^maybe pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of lVlandamus, declaring the inaction of the^respondent authorities in conducting enquiry and cancelling the^{pattadar pass book and title} deed issued in favour of the 5th respondent in respect of^{my land in Sy.No. 486,} 483,484,48O,479,478 and 520 admeasuring Ac.^'l .24 91s., situated^at Chinnakaparthy village, Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District,^{inspite of the written} representation dt. 15-3-2025, followed by^{personalvisits.} as^{being illegal'} arbitrary, unjust and u nconstitutional and consequently direct^{the respondent} authorities to conduct enquiry and cancel the^{pattadarpass book and title deed}

¶17

issued on the narr: of the 5th respondent in respect of the a)ove mentioned lands, and to g:ra,nt.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

Petition urrcl -" section 15'l cpc praying that in the circurrrstances stated in the affidavil fi ec i'r support of the petition, the High cour ma y be pleased to pass orders direr;t n ; the respondent authorities to consider and lake appropriate orders on the re'presentation dt. 15-3-2025, pending disposal ot the main writ Petition

¶20

Counsel for thr: Petitioner :SRl. K SHRIKANTH

¶21

Counsel for the llespondents: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶22

The Court made thrr following: ORDER

¶23

g:Y:W fr a.:. _.:'- . r*9r€ ,/

¶24

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASI(AR REDDY WRIT PETITION No. Lla79 of 2025

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Learned counsel appearing for tl.re petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition, with a liberty to avail the remedies as available under law.

¶27

Permission as sought for is accorded.

¶28

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting the liberty as prayed for. However, it is made clear that on the same set of cause of action, the petitioner is not entitied to file any writ petition in future before this Court. No costs.

¶29

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if

¶30

any, shal'l stand closed.

¶31

SD/-K.AMMAJI DEPUTY REGISTRAR

¶32

//TRUE COPY//

¶33

SECTION OFFICER

¶34

To,