Nalla Gangamma, Vs The State of Telangana

¶1

[³²⁹⁹¹

¶2

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

¶3

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

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 2'1370 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Nalla Gangamma, Wo.Late Narsaiah @^{Narsimha, Aged} about 66^years, Occ. Agriculture, R|/o.Vemulakonda village, Valigonda Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary,^Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The District Collector, Yadradri Bhuvanagiri District, At^Bhongiri.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Valigonda Mandal, Yadradri Bhuvanagiri^District.

¶14

Jinukala Padma, Wo.Jinukala Narasimha Yadav, Aged about 35^{years, Occ.} Housewife, Rio.Vemulakonda village, Valigonda Mandal,^Yadradri Bhuvanagiri District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying thatⁱⁿ the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^maybe pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, deciaring the Family Members Certificate No.FAMC-022100998192, dated 10.01.2022 issued by the 3rd respondent in favour of the 4th Respondent without issuing notice, conducting an enquiry or^pioviding an opportunity of being heard as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and amounts to a^gross violation of the^principles of natural^{justice and} consequently to set-aside the said certificate dated 10.01.2022^{issued by the 3rd} respondent

¶17

tA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶18

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 suspend the Family Members Certificate No .FAMC-022100998192, dated 10.01 .2022 issued by the 3rd respondent in favour of the 4th Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ Petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt THOTA VENKATESHAM

¶20

counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: sRt L. RAVINDER, AGp AppEARtNG ON BEHALF OF GP FOR REVENUE SRt K. MURALIDHAR REDDY

¶21

counsel for the Respondent No. 4 : SRI BADDAM NARSTMHA REDDY

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

t\

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.2137O of 2o25

Dated : O2.\2.2O25

Between

Nalla Gangamma.

. Petitioner.

And

The State of^Telangana, Represented^by its Principal Secretar5r, Revenue^Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad^and others.

¶31

... Respondents.

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief :

¶34

"...to issue a writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Family Members Certificate No.FAMC-O22100998 192, dated 10.0 L.2O22 issued by the 3'd^respondent in favour of the 4th Respondent without issuing notice, conducting an enquiry or providing an opportunity of being heard as illegal, arbitrar5r, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and amounts to a gross violation of the principles of natural^justice and consequently to set-aside the said certificate dated 10.01.2022 issued by the 3.d respondent....."

¶35

Heard Sri Thota Venkatesham, learned counsel for the petitioner, sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government^pleader appearing on behalf of learned Government Pleader for Revenue Sri

¶36

Page 2 of 6

¶37

K.Muralidhar Reddy and Sri Baddam Narsimha Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.4.

¶38

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of Late Nalla Narasimha. As the couple had no children, they lawfully adopted a male child, Master Shiva, through proceedings No.9802/ ACA/2olo, dated oz.o3.2ot4, issued by the Commissioner, women Development and child.welfare Department, Hyderabad. Upon the death of the petitioner,s husband on 17.or.2o2l, the petitioner, her.co-widow smt.Nalla Laxmamma and their adopted son Nalla Shiva became the only legal heirs. The deceased purchased agricultural lands under registered sale deed No.9 of 1994 and the petitioner also owns adjoining lands under sale deed No.1l24 of 1997. The family remains in peaceful possession of these properties.

¶39

(a) While things stood thus, without any relation to the family, the 4ft respondent liled O.S.No.99 of 2022 before the learned principal Junior civil Judge, Ramannapet, falsely claiming to be the adopted daughter of the deceased. Only then did the petitioner learn that the 4trr respondent had procured the impugned family members certificate by misrepresenting herself as an adopted child, arthough no female child was ever adopted by the family. The impugned family members certificate was issued on as per Memo No.S1346/Sec.lIl2/2oLo, Revenue Department, dated 2s.ro.2o2L. The petitioner submitted /

I

t

Page 3 of6

representations, dated 0S. 05. 20 23, 26.06.2023 and 30.^O 6.2025^seeking

¶44

cancellation of the certificate. No action has^been taken. The^3'd respondent issued the certificate without following the^mandatory procedure. No enquiry was conducted, no verification report^was obtained and no notice was issued to the actual legal heirs.^The arbitrary issuance of the certificate has enabled the^{4th respondentto} lay false claims^'over the petitioner's property, causing^serious prejudice. The impugned certificate, obtained through misrepresentation, is unsustainable in law and continues to^cause ongoing hardship. The petitioner therefore prays to set aside Family Members Certificate No. FAMC022100998192 and direct the 3'd respondent to conduct a fresh, lawful enquiry after affording due notice and hearing to all concerned.

¶45

Learned counsel for the respondent No.4, on the other hand, opposing the present writ petition submits that writ petition is not maintainable as it seeks adjudication of disputed questions of fact relating to family status, adoption and succession, all of which fall within the jurisdiction of the civil Court where O.S.No.99 of 2022 is already pending. It is further submitted that OS No.70 of 2024, filed by the petitioner herein, is also pending before the learned Principat Junior civil Judge, Ramannapet. The family members certificate was issued after due verification by the competent authority and the

¶46

(\

¶47

Page 4 of6

¶48

allegations of absence of enquiry or misrepresentation are unfounded and unsupported by evidence. No violation of fundamental rights is made out. The belated filing of the petition, long after issuance of the certificate, demonstrates that it is an afterthought intended to interfere with the civil proceedings. The petition is therefore devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed in limine.

¶49

Reiterating the averments made in the instructions submitted by the respondent No.3/tahsildar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that Smt.Jinukala Padma, W/o.Narsimha, resident of Vemulakonda, submitted an application for issuance of a family members'certificate. After following the^prescribed procedure, Certilicate No.FAMC-O22100998192 was issued. Proper notices were issued to the MPDO Office, Valigonda, the Gram Panchayat Office, Vemulakonda and the notice was also displayed on the notice board of the Tahsildar Office, Valigonda, on O3.01.2022. A field enquiry conducted by the Mandal Revenue Inspector conlirmed that Late Sri Nalla Narsimha had two wives i.e.Smt.Nalla Gangamma and Smt.Nalla Laxmamma and three children i.e. daughter Padma and sons Shiva and Dhanunjaya (deceased). The SSC records also reflect Smt.Nalla Padma as the daughter of Late Nalla Narsimha, which was further corroborated during local enquiry. It is further submitted that I.A. No.l2O of²⁰²² in O.S. No. 99 of 2022, a^partition suit between the

¶50

/ I

¶51

Page 5 of6

¶52

parties, is pending before the court of the principar Junior civl Judge, Ramannapet' In view of the above, the famly members, certificate was issued strictly in accordance with rures and after due enquiry and therefore the writ petition is devoid of merit.

¶53

\ \

¶54

6' Having considered the submissions of both parties and the materiar on record, this court finds that the petitioner has not made out any ground for interference under Article 226 ofthe constitution of India' The petitioner contends that Family Members, certi'cate No'FAMC-o22100ggg1g2 dated 10.01 .2022 was issued without notice or enquiry. However, respondent No.3 has placed on record that the statutory procedure was duly folrowed, notices were issued to the MPDO and Gram panchayat and the proposed issuance was displayed on the notice board of the tahsildar office on o3.0r .2022. A fierd enquiry conducted by the Mandar Revenue Inspector verified rocar records and ssc certi.cates, confirming that-late Nalra Narsimha had two wives and thiee ch,dren, incruding respondent No.4 and both documentary evidence ancr rocar enquiry consistently affirmed her status as the daughter of the deceased. The petitioner,s cha,enge to respondent No.4's rerationship raises disputed questions of fact requiring oral and documentary evidence, which cannot be adjudicated in writ proceedings, particularry when a partition suit in o.s.No.gg of 2022 is pending before the competent civ, court. It is werl settled that

I \

..,1 dt{t

Page 6 of6

ii^--)

a family members'certificate is an administrative document issued for limited purposes and does not cietermine title, succession, or legal heirship. In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the legal heir status of respondent No.4, this court linds no water in the grounds of writ petition warranting interference of this Court under Article 226 of the constitution of India and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶60

7 - In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to

¶61

costs.

¶62