Dismissed

S. Vinay Kumar v. The State of Telangana and 7 others

Telangana HC8 Sept 2025WP/23936/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of Writ Petition No. 23936 of 2021 under Article 226 seeking mandamus against revenue officials regarding revenue record entries. The Court observed that the cause of action had been addressed by respondents, rendering the petition infructuous. The writ was dismissed accordingly without costs.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner was directed that the writ petition falls to be dismissed as infructuous.

S. Vinay Kumar Vs The State of Telangana and 7 others — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

t^32ee l

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEIMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 23936 OF 2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

S. Vinay Kumar, S/o. Anjaneyulu, aged about 40 years, Occ ; Advocate, Fl/o H.No.2-80, Uddemarri Village, Muduchinthalapally Mandal, Medchal District.

¶10

....PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principle Secretary, Revenue Depatment, Secretariat Building, BRK Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶13

The District Collector, Medchal-Makajgiri District, Near ORR, Keesara, Medchal-Malkakgir District.

¶14

3- The Special Grade Deputy Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer, Keesara, Medchal-Malkakgiri District.

¶15

The Tahsildhar, Muduchinthalapally Mandal, Medchal-Malkakgiri District.

¶16

Smt.S.Swarna Latha, Wo. S.Narender, aged about 38 years, Occ^. Housewife, H.No. 2-81, Uddemarri Village, Muduchinthalapally lvlandal, Medchal District.

¶17

Smt.M.Saritha, W/o. M.Bhasker, aged about 36 years, Occ . Housewife, H.No. 6-6-269/76, Arun Jyothi Colony, Bansilalpet, Secunderabad.

¶18

Smt.K.Swapna, W/o. K.Santosh, aged about 34 years, Occ. Housewife, H-No. 2-81 , Uddemarri Village, I\iluduchinthalapally Mandal, Medchal District.

¶19

t 8. Smt.B.Kavitha @ Laxmi, W/o. B.Raju, aged about 32 years, Occ.Housewife, H.No. 7-161 , Ambedkar Nagar, Colony, Chintal, Qutubullapur Mandal, Medchal-Malakjgiri District.

¶20

.....RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Cou( may be pleased to issue Writ or order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ

¶22

of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nc . 2 lo 4 by entering the names of the Respondents 5 to g in Revenue Reco ls as pattadhar and possessors in respect of the agricultural land admeasurinc Ac.1-30 Gts in survey No. 386/8 situated at Uddemarri village, Muduchinthal:,1 ally tMandar, previous comes under shameerpet Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri t)i ;trict which is subject matter of title suit o.S.No. B2l201l pending on the file rf Senior civil Judge, R.R.District at Medchal which is illegal without following r1 re process of law and consequently further directed the Respondents 2 to 4 no .o enter the names ot the Respondents 5 to 8 in revenue records as pattadrr rr and possessors in respect of the agricultural land admeasuring Ac.1-30 Gts in sruvey No. 3g6/8 situated at Uddemarri Village, Muduchinthalapally Mandal. )revious comes under shameerpet lvlandal, Medchal-lVlalkajgiri District which is ;ubject matter of suit o.S.No.B2l20'l 7 pending on the file of Senior civil Judge : R.District at Medchar pending disposal of the main writ petition.

¶23

|.A.NO:1 OF 2021

¶24

Petition Under Section^'15'l cpc praying that in the cir lumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High co.r may be pleased to direct the Respondents 2 to 4 not to enter the names of the llespondents 5 to g in revenue records as pattadhar and possessors in respect .1 the agricurturar rand admeasuring Ac-1-30 Gts in survey No. 386/8 situated e uddemarri Viflage, Muduchinthalaparry Mandar, previous comes under s rameerpet Mandar, Medchal-Malkajgiri District which is subject matter of uit o.S.No.8212012 pending on the file of Senior civir Judge, R.R.District at [/ecr rar pending disposar of the main writ petition.

¶25

counsel for the Petitioner : Ms. suNrrHA, ADVOCATE FoR Ms. S.MADHAVI Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.l to 4 : AGp FOR REVENL E

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.S to g : M/s T.S.K.TRILOK tAJ

¶27

The Court made the following ORDER

I I

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶32

WRIT PEIITION No.23936 OF 2O2L

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

This Writ Petition is hled under Article 226 of Constiturron

¶35

of India seeking the following relief/s:-

¶36

"... to issue Writ or order direction morc particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 to 4 by entering rhe names of the Respondents 5 to 8 in Revenue Records as partadhar and possessors in respect of the agricultural land admcasuring Ac.l_30 Gts in survey No.386/B situated at Uddemarri Village, Muduchinthatapally Mandal, previoui comes under Shamecrpet Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District which rs subjcct matter of title suit O.S.No.82/2017 pend,ing on thc file of Senior Civil .Iudge, R R.District at Medchal which rs illegally without following the duc process ol larv

¶37

Heard Ms.Sunitha, learned counsel representing

¶38

Ms.S.Madhavi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Rakesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue representing learned Government pleader for Revenue appearing

¶39

for respondent Nos.l to 4.

¶40

When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the. petitioner submits that the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive as the purpose of this writ petition has been addressed by offrcial respondents. Therefore, he seeks to

¶41

dismiss this Writ Petition as infructuous.

¶42

Learned Assistalt Government pleader for Revenue

¶43

concedes to the said request.

¶44

¶45

Recording the submissions of both the le rrned counsel, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No <:, sts.

¶46

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, s raII stand closed

¶47

¶48

SEI/ M. OSMAN ALI BAIG AI;; s RAR

//TRUE COPY//

CER

L*g CCs to Gp FOR REVENUE, High Court for the S : te of Tetangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI ? 9nu^{CC ro lvls S iilROHRVt,} Advocate tOpUCl 9. 9n"^{CCto rM/s r.S K rRtLoK} nnL, AoJo.ri"jopucl 4. Two CD Copies

SA TKS ^1Mr

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:0810912025

t6 !E[ Wfr
...

ORDER

WP.No.23936 ot 2021

DISMISSING THE W.P AS INFRUCTUOUS^{WITHOUT COST:;. 1 '}

¶61

M^MT I tz[x

S. Vinay Kumar v. The State of Telangana and 7 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Vinay Kumar v. The State of Telangana and 7 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

Maheshwari Jayaprakash Vs The State of Telangana

Bhuvanagiri Venkata Lakshmi Nagavali Vs The State of Telangana

Sanga Ramakka Vs The State of Telangana

Vujjini Vamshidhar Vs State of Telangana.

K Kurumurthy Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Sri.Doma Venkataiah Vs The State of Telangana