Disposed

Thati Rasavva @ Potharaju Rasavva v. The State Of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Jan 2025WP/823/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a direction to the Sub Collector to decide her six-year-old application for an Occupancy Rights Certificate over inam land under the Telangana Abolition of Inams Act, 1955. The High Court directed the enquiry be concluded with notice to interested persons and reasoned orders within six months.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed directing respondent No.3 to conclude the ORC enquiry and pass reasoned orders within six months; no costs.

Thati Rasavva @ Potharaju Rasavva Vs The State Of… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^32s6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:823 OF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

Thati Rasawa @ Potharaju Rasawa, Wo.Late Pedda Laxmaiah, aged 57 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Achanpally Village, Bodhan Mandal, Nizamabad district.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

'1. The State Of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, T.S.

¶13

The District Collector, Nizamabad, Nizamabad district.

¶14

The Sub Collector, Bodhan, Nizamabad district.

¶15

The Tahsildar, Bodhan Mandal, Nizamabad district.

¶16

The Nizam Sugars Ltd, represented by its Managing Director, H.No. 5-10-174, 4th Floor, Shakkar Bhavan, Opp. LB Stadium, Basheerabagh, Hyderabad.

¶17

The Nizam Sugars Ltd, represented by its Deputy Manager, Core Committee, shakkar Nagar' Bodhan

¶18

..RES'.NDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 oI 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 3rd Respondent in not issuing Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC) in respect of the land in Sy. No. 81 to^an extent of Ac. 5-19 gts, situated at Achanpally village, Bodhan mandal, Nizamabad district and not disposing of the Case No. lnam/2231l2018E2-Section^{on the file of} 3rd Respondent as being illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable contrary to the^provisions of Telangana Abolition of lnams Act,^'1955, in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 3004 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent^to forthwith dispose of the Case No. lnam/2231l2018E2-Section, in accordance with Iaw.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct the 3rd Respondent to forthwith dispose of the Case No.^{lnam/223112018E2-} Section filed for issuance of Occupancy Right Certificate in respect of^{the landin} Sy. No. B'l , to an extent of Ac. 5-19 gts, situated at Achanpally Village, Bodhan mandal, Nizamabad district, in accordance with law,^pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.LAKSHMA REDDY Gounsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 4: AGP FOR ASSIGNMENT Counsdl for the Respondent Nos.S & 6: --

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

:try

¶25

.,,-.

¶26

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASXAR REDDY

¶27

trIRIT PETITION No.823 of 2025

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

It is stated that the petitioner's father in-law by name Potharaju Pedda Gangaiah was the inamdar and occupant of the land admeasuring Acs.5.19 guntas situated in Sy.No.81 of Achanapally Village, Bodhan Mandal, Nizamabad District and as per the revenue records, his name was shown as possessor of the said land and the said entries continued right from 1954i955 to 2016-2017. It is further stated that after the death of her father-in law, the petitioner submitted an application dated 72.12.2017 before respondent No-3 seeking for issuance of Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC) as per the provisions of the Telangana Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 (for short "the Inams Act") and the Rules made thereunder. It is further stated that acting on the said application, respondent No.3 had initiated enquiry and issued notice, dated 22.06.2018 in File No.Inam/223 1/ 2018E2-Section to all the interested persons. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after lapse of more than six years, respondent No.6 has not concluded [he enquiry initiated under the provisions of the Act and thereby, she is not in a position to receive various incentives i.e., investment

¶30

¶31

CVBR, J W1' 823 202s

¶32

subsidies sanctioned by the Government as pattadar from time to time to enable her to cultivate the said land

¶33

Considercd the submissions of the learned counsel for the pelitioner zrnd lcarned Assistant Government pleader for Assignment appe aring for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. In view of Lhe nature of the relief sought for in this writ petition, issuance cif notice to the unofficial respondents is dispensed with.

¶34

Leamed counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Telangana Abolition of Inams Act has been enacted in the year 1955 ancl after abolition of the inams, the lands are vested with the State free from al1 encumbrances. Learned counsel further submits tha1. t:vcn though the Government is conferred \vith the power to re grant, in terms of the Rules which came into force with effect from O1 .11.1973, the respondent authorities are not granting ORC and as such, the petitioner is not in a positron to cnjoy the absolute rights over the subject property.

¶35

In view of the above submissions and since it is stated that respondent No.3 has already initiated enquiry in F.rle No.Inam/ 22i31 / 2018E2-Section, this Court, without expressing

¶36

¶37

CVBR, J Wp 823 2025

¶38

any opinion on the merits of the matter, is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if respondent No.3 is directed to conclude the enquiry initiated under the provisions of the Act after issuing notice to a1l the persons interested and effected, as early as possible and pass reasoned orders in accordance with law. It is made clear that in any event, respondent No.3 shall conclude the enquiry not later than six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶39

With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed

¶40

of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶41

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,

¶42

shall stand closed.

¶43

SD/- T.CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGIS

//TRUE COPY//

S ON OFFICER

1 The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State Of Telangana.

¶48

2 The District Collector, Nizamabad, Nizamabad district.

¶49

3 The Sub Collector, Bodhan, Nizamabad district.

¶50

4 The Tahsildar, Bodhan Mandal, Nizamabad district.

¶51

5 One CC to SRI P.LAKSHMA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 6 Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶52

Two CD Copies PSK. PS

HIGH COURT

DATED:0910112025

ORDER

WP.No.823 of 2025

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶60

(
0?

Thati Rasavva @ Potharaju Rasavva v. The State Of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thati Rasavva @ Potharaju Rasavva 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Marri Malla Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Sareena Bai @ Sona Bai Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Sajid Ali Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.Samala Shobhana Vs The State of Telangana

Angotu Narsimha Vs The State of Telangana

Dasari Yadaiah Vs The State of Telangana