Allowed

Smt.Thumrugoti Mangamma v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Telangana HC9 Sept 2025WP/17502/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the matter requires detailed examination by revenue authorities regarding land possession and regularization. The proceedings initiated by the Tahsildar were set aside, and the writ petition was allowed with a direction to the authorities to reconsider the matter afresh within six months.

What did the court decide?

Matter remanded to revenue authorities for fresh inquiry and passing of orders within six months. The illegal proceedings in Lr.No. B/20/2020 are set aside.

Smt.Thumrugoti Mangamma Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

I g

¶2

[^32ee I

¶3

f,! n I t,I $ I{ l ,i ,ii i

¶4

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE-OF TELANGANA^{AT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

¶6

TUESDAY, THE NINTIT DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶7

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 17502 OF 2020 t

Between:

,:rY.1

*ii:

Smt.Thumrugoti Mangamma, W6.T{laxnraiah, eggd 53^{years, Occ.Agriculture,} R/o.Thimmapur Vitlage, Anumula Maixffi,^{NalgondaDistrict-} !i ...PETrnoNER

¶13

...PETrnoNER

¶14

The State of Telangana and 3o$rers, Rep. by^{its Principal Secretary,} Revenue Depa rtment, Secretaridt Build ings,^{Hyd erabad}

¶15

The District Collector, Nalgonda District

¶16

The Tahsildar, Anumula Mandal, Nalgonda^District.

¶17

Smt.Thumrugoti Venkatamma, Wo.Satyam, Aged^{56 years,Occ. Agriculture,} R/o. Thimma-pur Village, Anumula Mandal,^{Nalgpnda District.}

¶18

i ,; ...RESP.NDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article^,226 of tt# Constitution^{of lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the, amOa#l{ filed therewith,^{the High Court may be} pleased toto issue an order or OirbCt'i# or writ more^{particularlyone in the nature} ! of writ of mandamus, declaring the'Sdtion^{of the 3rd respondent in mutating the} land admeasuring Ac.1.20^gts., in Sy.No.200 of^{ThimmapurVillage,Anumula} Mandal, Nalgonda District, in the name of^{the 4th respondentwithoutissuing} i'4e notice, without conducting enquiry gb contemplated^{underthe Act, 2611971, as} arbitrary, illegal, violative of^{prirrcipt#.of} natural^{justice,contraryto the provisions} of Act 26t1g71and Rules mdde thereuMer, and^{violative of Artic{e 14, 21, 3O0A} of Constitution of lndia and to delete the name of^{4th respondentand record the} name of the petitioner in respect of the said^{land, by conductingenquiry pursuant} to final notice vide Lr.No. Bl2Ol2O20, dated^2710512020.

¶20

lA NO: I OF 2020

¶21

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 respondent No.3 to conduct the enquiry and pass orders correcting the entries in the revenue records in favour of the petitioner in respect of land an extent of A,:.1.20 gts., in y.N8'.200, pursuant to the final notice vide Lr.No. Bl2Ol2O20, clated 2710512020, during the pendency of writ petition, in the interest of^justice.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶23

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 pleased to permission petition .(he sub-division survey report in File No. Bl117l2O2O, dt.15.02.2o24, Notice dt.30.Ol .2p24, Enjoyment List, Podi Map, Tippan and [4easurements, on record in the above writ petition, in the interest of justice.

¶24

Counset for the Petitioner : SRI B.MAHENDER REDDY

¶25

Gounsel for the Respondents No.l&3 : SRI H.RAKESH KUMAR, AGP FOR REVENUE counser ror the Respondents No'4 ' H.:lt'^fi.=^?.f,[ixEi,

¶26

The Court macle the following: ORDER

¶27

lt ,'|l

¶28

It,!'

¶29

il il li I I I I I i ii :l

¶30

l !i IIl t

¶31

t/' <br>6

¶32

THE HON'BLE SRI JI'STICE^{E.V.VENUGOPAL}

trIRIT

No.175O2 oF 20.20

ORDER:

This writ Petition is filed^{under Article 226 0f the} Constitution of lndia,^{seeking t]re followingrelief/s:-}

¶37

,.... to issue an order or direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ^{of mandamus declaringthe action of the} 3.d respondent in mutating^{the land admeasuring Ac.1'2Ogts''} in Sy.No.ZOO of Thimmapur^{Village,AnurnulaMandal,} Nalgonda District, in the^{nameof tl.e 4th respondentwithout} issuing notice, without^{conductingenqulry as contemplated} under the Act, 26/1971, as^{arbitrary, illegal, violative of} principles of natural^{justice, contrar5r to thc prwisions of Act} 26l|971 and Rules made thereunder,^{and violative of Article} L4',2l,3OOA of Constitution^{of India and to delete the name of} 4tt' respondent and record^{the narrreof the petitioner in respect} of the i.ia t"rra by conducting^{enquirypursuantto final notice} vide Lr.No.B/2O/2020, dated^{27.O5.2O2Oand pass such other} order or orders ..."

¶38

Heard Mr.B.Mahender^{Reddy, learned counsel for the}

¶39

petitioner, Mr.H.Rakesh Krtmar,^{learned Assistant} Government Pleader^{representing learned Government} Pleader for Revenue^{appearing for resPondent Nos.1 to 3 and} Ms.Shakeela Bhanu, learned^{counsel representing} Mr.M.A.K.Mukheed,^{learned counsel for respondentNo.4.}

¶40

The brief facts of^{the case are that the mother of} petitioner and respondent No.4 i.e.,^{BoinapalliRamulamma} was the owner and^possessor of^{the land admeasuring} Acs.4.O7 gts., in Sy.No.2OO of Thimmapur^{Village, Anumula}

¶41

rr,'fu

¶42

¶43

Mandal, Nalgonda District; that the same was recorded as Acs.4.Olgts. only; that out of love and affection, Boinapalli Rarrulamma gifted the land admeasuring Acs.2.OO gts. in sy.lrto.2oo in favour of her elder daughter/respondent No.4 at the time of her marriage, vide unregistered gift deed dated 15.09.1981 and gifted the land admeasuring Ac.1.2O gts., in favorrr of her younger daughter/petitioner at ur" ti*" of her marrtage, vide unregistered gift deed dated 05.03.1993; that pursuant to policy formulated by the Government for rega..larization of unregistered transfers under section 5-A of tlre 'felangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, l97l (for short, "the Act 261 197l"l, the petitioner and respondent No.4 filed applications for regularization of unrejgistered gift deeds; that upon conducting due enquiry and recording the statement of Boinapalli Ramulamma (the dono:r), in the presence of witnesses namely Sri Kanakaiatr, Sri Satyam (husband of respondent No.4), Sri Ramachandraiah (husband of Donor), the Mandal Revenue Officer, on payment of requisite stamp drty, issued the regularization proceedings in Form-13B certificate vide ROR/ 2/98, dt.1S.07.1998, ROR/C/ L/gB, dt.13.02.1998

a\ o

respectively in favour of the Petitioner and respondent No.4; that pursuant to regularization, Pattadar Passbook and Titte deed was issued to the petitioner in respect of the schedule tand and since then, the petitioner is in peacgfi{ possession and enjoyment the schedule land; that after the said gift of Ac.1.20gts., in favour of petitioner and Acs.2.00 gts., in favour of respondent No.4, my mother Boinapalli Ramulamma had only Ac.O.2O guntas; that, subsequently Smt Boinapalli Ramulamma gifted the said land to an extent of Ac O.2O gts., in Sy.No.2OO and Ac.1.2O gts., in Sy.No.Lgg, to the petitioner vide Registered Gift Deed No.lL69|2OO7 dated O7.O4.2OOT and the Pattadar Pass book and Title deed was issued in favour of the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said land, adrneasuring Ac.1.2O gts. and Ac.0.20 gts., totalling to Ac.2.O0 gts., in Sy.No.2OO, and Ac.1.20 gts., in Sy.No.199, till date without any disturbance from anyone; that inspite of transferring the entire land in favour of her two daughters i.e., the petitioner and respondent No.4 and issuing the pattadar passbooks and title deeds, the land admeasuring Acs.2.OO gts., in Sy.No.200 is continued in the name of Boinapalli Ramulamma in the

¶49

¶50

¶51

patrrrnies. Taking advantage of the sarne, respondent No.4 got executed another gift deed in her favour in respect of non exising land in Sy.No .2OO to an extent of Acs.2.OO guntas vide Gift Deed No.2487 /2010; that respondent author-ities / without issuing any notice and without conducting any enqtriry and without issuing any proceedings, as contr3rnplated under the Act, 2611971 and Rules rnade thereund.er, mutated the schedule land in the name of respondent No.4; that upon knowing about the same, petitioner had submitted an application to respondent No.3 throtgh her husband, for correction of entries in the pahanies and [he Dharani website vide application dated 28.O1.2O2O. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.3 issued notice to respc,ndent No.4 and directed both the parties to be present on 0ti.O6.2O2O; however, respondent No.3 has not passed any order. Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.3 in entering the rrame of respondent No.4 in revenue records, without following due procedure as contemplated under the Act, 26lLSr71, the petitioner fited the present Writ Petition.

¶52

learned counsel for the petitioner vide I.A.No.1 of 2025 filed the additional documents i.e., the sub-division survey / a,,

report in File No.B/ LLT /2020, dated L5.O2.2O24, Notice dated 3O.O L.2O24, Enjoyment List, Podi M"p, Tippan and measurements etc., submits that the petitioner is in possession of the property in question and hence, tJre action of respondent No.3 in entering the name of respondent No.4 in revenue records in the land admeasuring Acs.2.OO guntas in Sy.No .2OO on the strength of the Gift Deed No.24bT]2OLO is illegat and arbitrary and thereby, sought to allow ttre Writ Petition.

¶57

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue by filing counter affidavit of respondent No.3 submits that as admitted by the petitioner, the proceedings No.ROR/2198 dated 15.07.1998 were issued in the year 1998 and the petitioner herein filed this Writ Petition after a lapse of about (221 years. He states that as per the R.O.R. Act, the appeal against the orders of the Mandal Revenue Oflicer/Tahsildar vests with the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned U/S.5(5) of the Act and that the petitioner ought to have filed a4 appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer. He contends that without exhausting the alternative remedy available in the Act, the petitioner had rushed to this Court at belated stage.

:'i

r- L.I

Hen.ce, he states that the writ Petition is not maintainable as the matter falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the civil court. Therefore, he seeks a direction to the petitioner and respondent No.4 to approach the civil court to redress their grievanCe.

¶62

Learned counsel for respondent No.4, by filing counter aflidavit contends that the land admeasuring Acs.2-oogts in Sy.No.2OO was mutated in favour of respondent No.4 through Gift Deed executed by the original owner/mother of respondent No.4 in the year 1981 and subsequently, ROR procr:edings were issued in favour of respondent No.4 in the year 1988. Since then, respondent No.4 is cultivating the tand as absolute owner. She further states that the present writ Petition is filed after a gap of (30) years and the petitioner does not have any loa;,s stand.i to file the writ Petition on this grourrd. Hence, she seeks to dismiss the Writ Petition.

¶63

Having regard to the submissions of all the learned counsel and on careful perusal of the additional material papers filed by the petitioner vide t.A.No. I of 2025, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is in possession and enjo5nnent of the property in question. Therefore, this matter

f /

,'/' // i. ,f, il i:l ir I t: i, il: l:l t., t -: i ,i'!i

¶68

¶69

requires a detailed examination by the revenue autlrorities. Hence, the proceedings in Lr.No.B/ 20 /2O2O, dated 27.O5.2O2O issued by respondent No.3/Tahsildar are s€t aside.

¶70

Accordiigly, this Writ Petition is allowed and remanded back to the revenue authorities, to consider afresh and pass appropriate orders, as per law, as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, on putting the effected parties on notice and afford,ipg them an opportunity of hearing. No c0sts.

¶71

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

¶72

closed.

¶73

56I.A.J-EYASREE:!.ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,. //TRUE COPY// @ i SECTION^OFFICER

¶74

To, 1. The PrinciPal^Secretary ,^{Revenue Department, Secretariat, Te{anganaState} Buildings,^HYderabad r;t

¶75

Thr- District^{Collector, Nalgonda District}

¶76

The Tahsildar,^{Anumula Mandal, Nalgonda District'}

¶77

one cc^{to SRI B.MAHENDER REDDY, Advocate.IoPUC]}

¶78

Two CCs^{to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana} tourl

¶79

One CC^{to SRI [\4.AK.MUKHEED,Advocate'[OPUC]}

¶80

Two CD CoPies.

t I

HIGH COURT

DATED i09l09l102i

t'n,
i,fl.
.,lt
,!
t

ORDER

WP.No.17502 of 2020

t
r( rtt- STA
(.a 2 1 JrN 2[2$ c)
r
t
r--
I

¶89

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶90

<br>I

Smt.Thumrugoti Mangamma v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Thumrugoti Mangamma v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

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

Kalidasu Anusha Vs The State of Telangana

Anjum Pervez Mohammed Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Kalluri Kanakamma Vs The State of Telangana

Kona Naveen Vs The State of Telangana

Pathuri Srikanth Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Cheruku Bichaiah and 2 others Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others