T L Mahender Goud Vs The State of Telangana And 8 Others

¶1

[^32e61

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 26224 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

T L lVlahender Goud, S/o.T .L .Kistaiah, Aged about 47 yrs, Occ, Agriculture, Rl/9.H,No,2- 234,C1o. Satti Reddy Building Jalpally Municipatlty Road, Jalpally Village, Saroor Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

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

¶12

The Special Tribunal, [/ahaboob Nagar District.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahaboob Nagar Division, Mahaboob Nagar District.

¶14

The Tahsildar, Bhoothpur Mandal, Mahaboob Nagar District.

¶15

Sri. Chinna Jangaiah, S/o. Choudappa, aged about 52 yrs, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o. Ravulapally Village Bhoothpur lvlandal, ltilahaboob Nagar District

¶16

Sri. Pentaiah, S/o. Choudappa, aged about 50 yrs, Occ. Agriculture , Rl/o. Ravulapally Village Bhoothpur Mandal, Mahaboob Nagar Diskict

¶17

S. Kamalakar, S/o. keshaiah, aged about 64 yrs, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H.No. 3-5-32/9, Keshava Nagar Colony, Near^'16 Shutters, Hyderaguda, Rajendra Nagar [Vlandal, Ranga Reddy District,

¶18

S. Surekha, Wo. Late. Prem Kumar aged about 47 yrs, Occ. Housewife, R/o. H.No.3-5-32/9, Keshava Nagar Colony, Near l65hutters, Hyderaguda, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶19

S. Raj Kumar, S/o. Pedda Maisaih, aged about 54 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.3-5-3219, Keshava Nagar Colony, Near l65hutters, Hyderaguda, Rajendra Nagar Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy 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 Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the orders of the Special Tribunal, Mahaboob Naghar District in CaseNo.Dl114212021,(ROR file No. BiROR/3503/2020 ) dated 1510612021 in dismissing the appeal filed under Section 5 (5) of the then T.S. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act,^'1971 , as being illegal, arbitrary,

¶22

unreasonable, violatior of^{principles of natural} .lustice^{and contrary to the} provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land^{and Pattadar Pass Books Act,2020} (hereinafter referred to^;as Act No.9^{of 2020), aparl from beingviolation of Articles} 21 and 300-4 of the constitution^{of lndia and set asidethe same and remand} back the case to the office of^{respondentNo.2 to conduct fresh trialby} opportunity may be^given to^{the petitioner nor his counsel}

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶24

Petition under se.ction 151 CPC^{prayingthatin the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in^{suoportof the petition,the High court may be pleasedto} suspend the orders of the^{special Tribunal, Mahaboob NagarDistrict in caseNo} D1t142t2021,^(ROR file^{No B/ROR/3503/2020) dated 1510612021pending} disposal of the Writ Petition

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl.^{DASARI KRISHNAREDDY}

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.1to4: GP FOR REVENUE}

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.^5to9:--

¶28

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶29

1

¶30

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶31

WRIT PETITION No.26224 of 2o22

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶34

India, is filed seeking the following relief:

¶35

"....to issue a utrit, order or a direction more particularQ1 one in the nature of uit of mandamus declaing the ord.ers of the Special Tibunctl Mahoboobnagar Distict in Case No.Dl/ 142/2O21 ROR File No.B/ ROR/ 3503/ 2O2O dated 15/O6/2O21 in dtsmissing the appeal filed under Section 5 (5) of the then T.S Rights in LcLncl and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 as being illegal, arbitrar!, unreasonabLe, uiolation of pinciples of natural justice and contrary to the prouisions of the Telangano Rights in Lctnd and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2O20 hereinctfter referred te as Act No.9 of 2O2O oport from being uiolotion of Articles 21 and 3OOA of the Constitution of India and set aside the same and remand back the case to the olfice of respondent No.2 to conduct fresh trail by opportunitA mag be giuen to the petitioner nor his counsel. . .. "

¶36

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

¶37

The petitioner herein along with one T. Radhika filed an appeal vide No.B/ROR/3503/2020 under Section 5⁽⁵⁾ of the Telangana State Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 before respondent No.3-the Revenue Divisional Officer, questioning the entries made in the revenue records in favour of respondent Nos.5 to 9 in respect of land admeasuring^Ac.6

¶38

2

¶39

15 guntas in^{lSy.No.l11/1 situatedatRavulapaliyVillage,} Bhoothpur Mandal, Mahabubnagar^{District andpending} consideration o i the same, the Government^{has repealedthe} Act, 197 | and enacted new Act^{called as "the TelanganraRights} in Land and PeLttadar Pass Books Act,^{2O2O" (fot sh,crt 'Act,} 2O2O'l and as per G.O.Ms.No.4^{RevenueDepartmentdated} l2.O I .2021 , tl-rt: said appeal was transferred^{to respondent} No.2-the Special Tribunal, Mahabubnagar District,^and renumbered as Case No.D1/Ia2/2021; and the said^appeal was dismissed^vide order dated 15.06.2021.^{The grievance of} the petitioner is that urithout serving any noticds^{and without} providing an op,portunity of hearing to him, respondent No.2 has dismissed the said appeal, therefore,^prays this^{(lourt to} Case set aside the order dated 15.06.20|21 in No.D1/ l42l2Ct21 (ROR File No.B/ROR/3503/2020)^{passed by} respondent No.12 and remand back for fresh trial by^providing an opportunitl' of hearing to him.

¶40

Learned t;ounsel for the petitioner contended 1.hat the properties mentioned in the sale deed and the rnutation effected in favorrr of respondent Nos.S to 9 are different and are distinct and therefore, the respondent-authorities

I I

Y

3

conferred with power to carry out necessary corrections as per the Rules framed under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 197 I (for short 'the Act, l97l'l and instead of exercising the said power, respondent No.2 has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner granting liberty to approach the competent Civil Court

¶45

A careful reading of the impugned order dated 15.06.2021 reveals that the names of respondent Nos. I and I 2 .\ are mutated in respect of the subject property by virtud of registered sale deed dated 19 .O4 .198L . The appellate authority has issued notices to the petitioner and has also taken into consideration of the entries in the revenue records before dismissing the said appeal. Since there are serious disputes with regard to the extent, identification, localization of the boundaries and the execution of the sale deeds and its genuineness in respect of the subject property, respondent No.2 appellate authority, has rightly stated that it does^not have any power to examine the said issues; and the sarne^are required to the adjudicated only after examination of^the evidence of various records, wherein the names of^the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 to 9 are recorded

¶46

/

¶47

4

¶48

In vierl, of the above, this Court does not find any illegality, irregularitl, and warranting interference of the orders of the appellate authority under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accor<lingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶49

As a sequ,:I, the miscellaneous petitions ltending, if any, shall stand c1osed

¶50

SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSI NT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// il E OFFICER

¶51