HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA WRIT PETITION No.11661 of 2012 Sri Chandra Mohan S/o Late Sri.Ram Prathap, Aged about 34 years, Occ:Business, R/o H.No.4-7-1, Kasabgally and Vinayaknagar and other.

….Petitioner VERSUS The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad District and four others.

… Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 13.02.2023 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO 1. Whether Reporters of Local Yes/No newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may Yes/No be marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish Yes/No to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

_____________________

J. SREENIVAS RAO, J THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO + WRIT PETITION No.11661 of 2012 % Dated 13.02.2023 # Sri Chandra Mohan S/o Late Sri.Ram Prathap, Aged about 34 years, Occ:Business, R/o H.No.4-7-

1, Kasabgally and Vinayaknagar and other ….Petitioner VERSUS $ The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad District and four others.

… Respondents ! Counsel for Petitioners : Sri D.Madhava Rao, Adv ^ Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : G.P for Revenue, Sri Ghanshyamdas Mandhani, Sri V. Rohith.

< GIST:

> HEAD NOTE:

? CITATIONS:

1. AIR 2008 AP 15

2. 2002 4 ALD 497 (DB)

3. 2009 1 ALD 248 4. 2014 2 ALD 246 5. 1976 3 SCC 215 6. 2014 1 ALD 406 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.11661 of 2012

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking following relief:

“...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in considering the appeal as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the order dated 17.03.2012 passed by the respondent No.2 in case No.D2/104/2011..”

2. Brief facts of the case:

2.1 The claim of the petitioners is that the petitioners along with others inherited agricultural lands in Survey Nos.2852 and 2854 situated at Nizamabad to an extent of Acs.2.1 guntas and Acs.1.11 guntas respectively to the total extent of Acs.3.12 guntas. The said lands were owned and possessed by Sri Katike Mohinuddin, S/o Laxmanji as per the revenue records and Khasra Pahani for 1954-55. Katike Mohinuddin died in the year 1962 leaving behind his two sons namely Miryalkar Bada Sab @ Bajrang and Miryalkar Ramji and both expired in the years 1974 and 1986 respectively leaving behind their children and grandchildren. The original owner and pattadar had four brothers namely Miryalkar Khaloji, Miryalkar Gangoji, Miryalkar Laxmanji and Miryalkar Kishanji all sons of Laxmanji.

2.2 It is further submitted that the above said land is recorded in revenue records in the name of Katike Mohinuddin as owner and pattadar, however in the year 2004, the said land got mutated in favour of Miryalkar Kishanji S/o Laxmanji, who is one of the brothers of Katike Mohinuddin. The application of mutation under ROR was filed and the same was effected and pattadar pass books and title deeds were issued to Miryalkar Kishanji without issuing any notice to the petitioners who are the legal heirs and without conducting any enquiry.

2.3 The petitioners immediately after knowing that mutation was sanctioned in the year 2004 in favour of Miryalkar Kishanji, approached respondent No.1 and submitted application on 19.12.2009 requesting to conduct enquiry about mutation of Acs.3.28 guntas in the name of unofficial respondents and take appropriate steps for deletion of the revenue entries and also for cancellation of the pattadar pass books and title deeds and take appropriate action with regard to mutation of the unofficial respondents’ names in the revenue records in respect of Acs.3.12 guntas in Survey No.2852 and 2854 and cancel the title deeds and pattadar pass books issued in favour of the unofficial respondents. Basing on the said representation, respondent No.1 directed respondent No.3 to conduct enquiry and submit report. Pursuant to the same, respondent No.3 after conducting enquiry submitted