Allowed

M/s. Venkateswara Developers v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Apr 2025WP/37011/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana allowed a writ petition challenging the authority\'s rejection of an application for mutation and pattadar passbook. The Court set aside the rejection order, directing authorities to consider relevant sale deed and mutation records within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned endorsement set aside; petitioner permitted to file fresh application; authorities directed to pass reasoned order within eight weeks.

M/s. Venkateswara Developers Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

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

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 37011 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. Venkateswara Developers, A partnership firm situated at Hanumakonda Rep by its Partner, Smt Pingali Kavitha W/o. Pingali Sanjeeva Reddy, aged 51 years Occ. housewife, Rl/o, H No. 1-7 -928 Advocates Colony, Hanmakonda

¶9

...PETrroNER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principle Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat Building, Hyderabad

¶12

The District Collector, Warangal District at Warangal

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hanamakonda Division, Warangal District

¶14

The Tahsildar, Khila Warangal Mandal, Warangal District

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

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 Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in^passing the impugned Endorsement vide Rc No.81204212024, dated .O8.2024^(signedon 20.09.2024) by rejecting the representation of the^petitioner seeking for mutation and issue pattadar passbooks in connection with the lands in Sy No. 123,¹²⁶ and 127 to an extent of Ac.6.20 gts situated at Thimmapur Haveli Village, Hanamakonda Mandal, Warangal District without^giving any reasons wherein pendency of the writ petition and contempt case before the Hon'ble Court rejecting the representation by issuing the impugned^proceedings by the^4th respondent^is illegal, arbitrary and against the^principles of natural^justice and also violative^of Articles 14, 19,21 and 300-4 of Constitution of India by^setting aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to issue the online

¶17

pattadar passbooks and title deeds by mutating the petitioner name in the online revenue records in dharani portal immediately in the interest of justice lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶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 Direct the respondents to issue the online pattadar passbooks and ti e deeds by mutating the petitioner name in the online revenue records in dharani portal in connection with the lands in Sy No. 123, 126 and 127 to an extent of Ac.6.20 gts situated at Thimmapur Haveli Village, Hanamakonda Mandal, Warangal District immediately by suspending the lmpugned Endorsement vide Rc No. 81204212024, dated .08.2024 (signed on 20.09.2O24) passed by the 4th respondent, pending disposal of the main writ petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. MUMMANENI SRIN|VASA RAO

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶24

WRIT PETITION No.37O11 of 2024

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This Writ Petition, undcr Article 226 of thc Constitution^of

¶27

India, is filed seeking the following relief:

¶28

"....fo issue a Wrtt, Order or Direction more^{particularLg one in the nature} of Wit of Mandamus declaing the action^{of the4th respondentin passing} th.e impugned Endorsement uide Rc. No.B/ 2042/ 2024 dated^.08.2024 signed on 20.09.2024 bg rejecting the^{representqtion} of^{the pettttoner} seeking for mutation ond issue Pattqdar^passbooks tn^{connection uith} tle tands in Sy.Nos.123, 126 and 127 to ctn ertent of Ac.6.20^gts situated at Thimmapur llaueh Village, I lQrnmQkonda Mondal,^Warangal Distict without giuing ang reasons wherein^pendencg oI^the urit^petition qnd contempt cose before the Honble Cowl rejecting the representation by issuing the impugned^proceedings by the 4t'^{respondentis illegal,} arbitrary and against the princrples of natural^justice and^{also urolatiue} of Articles 14, 19, 21^qnd 3O0A of Constitution of Indta^{bg setting aside} the same and consequentllJ dtect the respondents to issue the^online pattador passbooks and title deeds bg mutating the petitioner nameⁱⁿ the online reuenue records in dharani portaL itnmediatelA in^{the interest} ofjustice...."

¶29

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for^the

¶30

parties and perused the record

¶31

It is stated that the petitioner-firm is owner and possessor of agricultural lands admeasuring Ac.4.20 gts in Sy.No.123,^Ac.1.30 gts in Sy.No.126, Ac.0. 1O gts rn Sy.No. 127 total admeasuring Ac.6.2O gts situated at Thimmapur Haveli^{Village, Hanamkonda} Mandal, Warangal District, having purchased the same under registered sale deed dated 24.O1 .2OO8 bearing document No.5389/2OO8 and the name of the petitioner was mutated in the

-.li';, i. ,:€"6t

I i,

revenue records vide proceedings in Rc.No.2OOlAlTtg/2020 dated 17.O4.2O1O. It is further stated that the petitioner has made an applicaLion before the respondent No.4 seeking to issue new pattadar pass book, and when there was no action, the petitioner was constrained to file W. p.No. ] 8302 of 2023 on the file of rhis Court. This Court uide order dated 1 1 .0 1 2024 disposed of the said writ petition, directing the respondents to consider the onrine Dharani Application dated ls.or .2023 vide Reference No.2300114144-TM(33) Module for pass Book data correction along rvith the representation dated 05.O8.2022 su bmitted by the petitioner for issuance of pattadar passbook in tl-re namc of the petitioner-firm, and record entries in the Dharani portal in respect of the subject lands, by issuing notice to all concerned including the petitioner and after affording opportunity of hearing, pass orders in accordance with law within a period of 45 days [rom the date of receipt of a copy of the order. It is stated that in pursuance of the aforesaid order, the respondent No.4 has passed the impugned endorsement vide Rc.No.B/ 2042/2024 dated 20.O9.2024 rejecting the application and the representation of the petitioner. Hence the writ petition.

¶36

4 The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner-firm has purchased the subject lands under registered

¶37

¶38

sale deed dated 24.O1.2008 bearing document No.5389/2008 from the lawful owners, who were protected tenants and were issued Certihcate under Section 38-E of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) and Agricultural Land Act, 1950 (for short "Tenancy Act,,). It is also submitted that the name of the petitioner was mutated in the revenue records uide proceedings in Rc.No.2OO/A/718l2O2O dated 17.O4.2OIO. It is further submitted that even though this Court uide order dated 11.O1.2024 in W.P.No. 183O2 of 2023 specifically directed the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner's online Dharani applicatron dated 15.07.2023 along with the earlier representation dated 05.08.2O22 after issuing notice and affording an opportunity of hearing, the respondent No.4 erroneously rejected the petitioner's application vide impugned Endorsement Rc.No.B/2042 12024 dated 20.O9.2024 without properly considering the material documents and without assigning valid reasons and thus, the learned counsel prayed this Court to allow the writ petition by setting aside the impugned endorsement.

¶39

A perusal of the impugned Endorsement Rc.No.B/2O4212024 dated 20.09.2024 issued by the respondent No.4 reveals that the petitioner's application for issuance of Pattadar passbook was rejected on the grounds that no entries were found in the revenue records showing the petitioner's vendors as pattadars for the

¶40

¶41

.q:?%e
11...i . : -, ":-*;j:':
,' .!6.i{&
-- l-'' ' '
,.
\ <br>

¶42

subject lands; and that the petitioner failed to physically establish the boundaries of the subject lands on ground. However, it is the specific case of the petitioner that the subject lands were purchased under a registered sale deed daLed 24.O7.a,0O8 bearing Document No.5389/2008 from lawful owners who were issued 38-tr Certihcates under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950. It is also borne out from the record that mutation proceedings vide Rc.No.200/A/718l2OlO dated 17.04.2010 were issued by rhc revenue authorities, wherein the names of the petitioner's vendors were recorded as pattadars prior to the said mutation in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, the rejection of the petitioner's application on the ground that there were no entries in the name of the vendors is factually incorrect. Further, the failure to demarcate the boundaries cannot, by itself, be a ground to reject the mutation, particularly when the ownership rights based on registered sale deed and mutation orders aiready exist on record. The impugned endorsement has been passed without proper appreciation of the documents available on record and therefore, the same is 1iab1e to be set aside.

¶43

In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned Endorsement vide Rc.No.B/ 2042 I 2024 dated, 2O.O9.2024

---::= 'F*

issued by the respondent No.4 is set^{aside, The petitioneris} pe rmitted to make fresh application in the Dharani Portal duly enclosing all the relevanl documents. On hling such^{application,the} respondent-authorities shall examine the^{sameduly taking into} consideration of the registered sale deed,^{dated 24.0I.2008 and} mutation proceedings, dated 17.O4.2010 and il^{the said application} fulfills all the requirements mentioned in^{CCLA'scircularNo. 1 of} 2021, daLed l5.Ol.2O2I and Circular No.1 of^{2024' dated} 28.02.2024^{and also the provisions of the TelanganaRights in Land} and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O, consider^{t.he same and pass} reasoned order in accordance^{with law and communicatethe same} to the petitioner, within a period of eight^{(08) weeks from the date of} receipt of a copy of this order.

¶48

As a sequel, the miscellaneous^{petitions pending, if any, shall}

¶49

stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶50

SD/^{.P.PADMANABHAREDDY} D PUTY REGISTRAR

//TRUE^COPY//

ECTION OFFICER

To,

The^{Principle Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat Building'} T.S.,Hvderabad

¶55

l, lliH#lilu,grunffilgrrtpru;'dffi:"^., Hvderabad [OUTI t. lrwo CD^CoPies

BM LS

HIGH COURT

DATED:0810412025

1r,L:51,./
,/., ot(
,t
,:) (
(
0 2 lt,i,,t ZUS
a
. ').
ta .' I +
'a
.ll,rtrcHE o

¶62

ORDER

¶63

WP.No.37011 of 2024

¶64

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

M/s. Venkateswara Developers v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Venkateswara Developers v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Kudumula Jayanthi Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. Kotapati Koteswara Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Chintala Venkata Narayana Vs The State of Telangana

Chada Sudhakar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Keesari Anji Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Bejjanki Bhaskar And Another Vs The State of Telangana And Another