Ravanamoni Muthyalu Vs the State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Ravanamoni Muthyalu Vs the State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction (mandamus-type) to respondent No.4 (Tahasildar, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal) to examine the petitioners' case; if the petitioners satisfy all requirements under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2020 and the CCLA circular instructions (Circular No.1 of 2021 and Circular No.1 of 2024 dated 28.02.2024), to consider the same for rectification of the entries in the revenue records; if otherwise not entitled, to pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law and communicate it to the petitioners within eight (8) weeks of receipt of a copy of the order. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent No.4 (Tahasildar) in not implementing Proceedings No.B/1098/2018 dated 20.06.2018 — transfer of title in respect of agricultural land in Sy.Nos.136, 137, 138, 139 and 142, totally Ac.21-03 gts at Dandumailaram Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District — is illegal and arbitrary, and whether the revenue records should consequently be rectified. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Ends of justice would be met if respondent No.4 examined the case of the petitioners and, if the petitioners satisfied all requirements under the provisions of the Act, 2020 and the circular instructions issued by CCLA (Circular No.1 of 2021 and Circular No.1 of 2024 dated 28.02.2024), considered the same for rectification of the entries in the revenue records.

Key takeaways

If the petitioners are otherwise not entitled, the respondent authorities shall pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioners within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶43
With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of; there is no order as to costs, and as a sequel the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Art. 226), High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, decided 14.02.2025 by C.V. Bhaskar Reddy J. Eight agriculturist petitioners of the Ravanamoni family (Dandumailaram Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District) claimed ownership/possession of Ac.21-03 gts in Sy.Nos.136, 137, 138, 139 and 142 and sought a writ of mandamus declaring illegal respondent No.4's (Tahasildar's) non-implementation of his own Proceedings No.B/1098/2018 dated 20.06.2018, which had been issued to rectify revenue-record entries pursuant to their earlier application and to implement the decree in O.S.No.62 of 1976 (District Munsiff, Ibrahimpatnam) obtained for rectification of Record of Rights; non-implementation allegedly denied them Government investment subsidies. They had also moved through the Dharani portal under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2020, and the Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue did not dispute that application. HOLDING (single opinion): ends of justice would be met if respondent No.4 examined the petitioners' case and, if they satisfied all requirements of the Act, 2020 read with CCLA Circular No.1 of 2021 and Circular No.1 of 2024 dated 28.02.2024, considered the same for rectification of the revenue-record entries; if otherwise not entitled, a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law was to be passed and communicated within eight (8) weeks. Petition disposed of; no costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed. No precedent cited, relied upon or engaged with; no dissent.

t,

:,;**

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

[^32e6 ]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO:4289 OF 2025

Between:

RAVANAMONI TUUTHYALU, S/o Ramulu, Aged About 74 yrs, Occ. Agriculture, R/oH.No.3-5B,DandumailaramVillage, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

RAVANAMONI BALAIAH, S/o Ramulu, Aged About 79 yrs, Occ.Agriculture, Rl/o H.No.3-53, Dandumailaram Village, Ibrahimpatnam [Vtandal, Ranga Reddy District.

RAVANAMONI SHANKAR, S/o Late Veeraiah, Aged About 35^yrs, Occ.AgricuJture, Rl/oH.No.3-53,DandumailaramVillage, lbrahimpatnam lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District..

RAVANAMONI SATAIAH, S/o Ramulu, Aged About 68 yrs, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o H.No.3-52, Dandumailaram Village, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

RAVANAMONI BUGGA RAMULU, S/o Late Anjaiah, Aged About 55^yrs, Occ.Agriculture, Rl/o Dandumailaram Village, lbrahimpatnam l/andal, Ranga Reddy District.

RAVANAMONI JANGAIAH, S/o Late Anjaiah, Aged About 48^yrs, Occ. Business, Rl/o Dandumailaram Village, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

RAVANAMONI KRISHNA, S/o Late Anjaiah, Aged About 45 yrs, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Dandumailaram Village,lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

B. RAVANAIUONI SHOBA, S/o Late Yadagiri, Aged About 45^yrs,Occ. Agricullure, Rl/o Dandumailaram Village, lbrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga ReddY District

...PET.r.NERS

AND

THE STATE OF TELANGANA, Rep. by its Principal Secretary^(Revenue), Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, Ranga Reddy District.

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, lbrahimpatnam Division, Ranga Reddy District

THE TAHASILDAR, lbrahimptnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226^{of lhe} Constitution of India^praying that^{in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may^be pleased to issue Writ, Order or^direction more^particularly one in the^{nature of}

Writ of Mandamus^{Ceclaringthe action of the Respondentsmore particularly} Respondent^{No.4 herein in not implementingthe Ordervide Proceedings} No,Bl1098/2018,Dt.20/06/20l8,byTransferringtheTitleinrespe.rtofAllthat the Agriculture^{Land in Sy No'136 an extent of Ac'1-11 gts' 137 an extent of} Ac.4-24gts,^{138 an extent of Ac 6-17 gts'139 an extent ofAc4-1 ti gts' 142 an} extent of^{Ac.4-16gts TotallyAdmeasuringAc'21 -03 gts by situatedat} Dandumailaram^{Village,lbrahimpatnam Mandal' Ranga Reddy District''as} illegal, arbitrary,^{in violation of principles of Natural Justice beside beingin} violation of^{ROR, Act andconsequentlyto direct the respondentNo 4 herein to} RectifytheRevenueRecordsandimplementtheTransferofTitleasperthe ordersvideProceedingsNo.B/1098/201B,Dt.2oto6t2o1Bissuedbythe4th Respondent^{hereinn respect of All that the Agriculture Land in liy No'136an} extentofAc.l-11gts,'l3TanextentofAc'4-24gts'l38anextentofAc'6-17gts' l3ganextentofAc4-15gfs,142anextentofAc.4-l6gtsTotallyAdmeasuring ;.Ac.21-O3gtssituatedatDandumailaramVillage'lbrahimpatnamlt/landal'Ranga Reddy District

Counsel^{for the Petitioner:SRI' A' VIJAY BASKARREDDY}

Counsel for^{the Respondents: Ms' SWETCHA'AGP FOR REVENUE}

The Court^{made the following:ORDER}

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

WRIT PETITTON N0.4289 of 2o25

ORDER:

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is hled seeking the following reliet

"..-.to issue Wit, Order or direction more porticalarlu one in the lature lf^{Wrtt ofMandamus dectaring} the aition of the Respondents more particularlg respondeit No.+ iirein in not implementing the Order uide pioceeiings Uo.e/ lOgB)2018 d.ated 2.0/06/2018 bg transferring the Title in ,espect o1 All that the Agncuhure Land in Sg.Uo.iS6 an ertent ofAc1.li gts, 137 an extent .of Ac.4.24 gts, 13g an extent of Ac.6'.17 gts, 159 an ertent of Ac.4.15 gts, 142 an ertent of ac.+.lO gt" foioiiy ia^easuing 4c.21.03 gts situated at Dandumailaroi Viltog", lArini^potnoi U1n(at Ranga Red_dg Dtstrtct as _iltegal, arbit/ary, ii uiolation of pinciples of Natural Justtce besid.e ieing tn ui"i,tiii"i of RoR Act a.nd consequentlg to direct the respondi'nt Uo.+ ii.i" to .Rectifu the Reuenue Record_s and i.mplement the Transfer- oj'Tifle as per the Orders uirle proceedings No.B/ I 098/ 2O1B Dt' 20/ 06/ 2018 2suecl,^{ba tlte 4th responient hereintn ,"rp.A- o1-e} -gts, that the Agncukure Land in Sg.No.136 an ertent of'Acl.1i 137 an extent _of^{Ac.4.24gts,13g an extent of ac.O.lf gts,} liV an extent of Ac.4. 1 5 gts, 1 42 an ertent of Ac.4. I 6 gt, foioiig- ia^easuing 4c.21.03 gts situated. ot Danduma aroi Vi og", "laroni*potno Mandol, Ranga Reddg Distict...."

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

It is the case of the petitioners that they are the owners and possessors of rand in Sy.No. 136 to an extent of Ac 1 . 1 1 gts, Sy.No.137 to an extent of Ac.4.24 gts, Sy.No.13B to an

2

extent of Ac6.77^{gts, Sy'No.139to arr extent of Ac 4'15 gts'} Sy.No.142 to^{arl extent of Ac.4.16 gts in total admeasuring} Ac.21.03 tlts situated^at Dandumarlaram^Village' Ibrahimpatnam Mandal,^{Ranga Reddy District' It is further} stated that :etitioner^{No.2, along with others filed O S'No'62} of 1976 befc,re the^{DistrictMunsiff at Ibrahimpatnarnseeking} for rectilicarion of^{Record of Rights over the suit schedule} property and the said^{suit was decreedon 24'0'l'1976 in} favourofthrlpetitionerstherein.Itisfurtherstatedt-hatwhen thesaiddecreewasnotimplemented,thepetitionershavefiled an application^{before the respondents seeking amendmentof} Records of Rights^{and acting on thesaid application'} respondent No.4 issued^{proceedings uide No'BlllO98 l2ol8'} dated 20.06.2018^{for rectilicationofthe entries;and for} implementation^{of the judgmentand decree dated 2'11'O4'1'976'} The grievar^ce of^{the petitioners is that even after rs;suanceof} the said^{proceedingsby respondentNo'4, no stepsare taken} bytherespond.entauthoritiesforrectificationoftheentriesin the revenut:^{records ald as such, they are not in a position to} receive an-r' incentives^{being salctioned by the Government} under investment subsidies;^{and they have also submitted}

j i .l

application through appropriate module in Dhara,i portal to carry out the necessary corrections in the revenue records under the provisions of the Telangala Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2O2O (for short,Act, 2O2O).

Ms. Swetcha, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents has not disputed the submission of application by the petitioners.

In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if respondent No.4 is directed to examine the case of the petitioners and if the petitioners satisfy a1l the requirements under the provisions. of the Act, 2O2O and the circular instructions issued by CCLA uide Circular No.1 of 2O2I, dated, lS.OI.2O2l ald Circular No.1 of 2024, dated 28.02.2024, consider the same for rectification of the entries in the revenue records and if the petitioners are otherwise not entitled, the respondent authorities sha11 pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioners within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4

-)

With th e above^{observations, this WritPetition ts} disposed of.^{No order as to costs'}

As a sequel,^{the miscellaneous petitions pending' if any'} sha1l stand^closed.

SD/.A.V,S. PRASAD AS ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// FFICER

To, 1. THE Principal Secretary^{(Revenue), Secretariat Building, T,S.,Hyderabad.} 2. fHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, Ranga Reddy^District. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,^{lbrahimpatnam Division,Ranga} Reddy District 4. THE TAHASILDAR, lbrahimptnam^{[/andal, Ranga Reddy District.} 5. One CC to SRl. A. VIJAY BASKAR REDDY,^Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court^{for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies BIV BS *

l I I I i i l i I

HIGH COURT

DATED:1410212025

)

ORDER

WP.No.4289 of²⁰²⁵

o 'ar: s 14', 6
e
a-
.,]
2 'i25
t a

DISPOSING^{OF THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT COSTS

(9,P'E %v