HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.33867 of 2024

ORDER

It is stated that the petitioners are the owners and possessors of the land admeasuring Ac.6.24 guntas in Sy.No.199 situated at Devunpally Village, Kamareddy Mandal, Kamareddy District, having succeeded the said property from their ancestor namely Late Mir Arshad Ali. It is further stated that when disputes arose among the co-sharers, a suit for partition of joint family properties has been instituted vide O.S.No.727 of 1972 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kamareddy and preliminary decree was passed on 31.12.1981 and thereafter in terms of the Advocate- Commissioner Report, dated 04.04.1994, a final decree has been passed in I.A.No.85 of 1985 in the said suit. It is further stated that seeking for implementation of the final decree proceedings, the petitioners have filed E.P.No.2 of 2003 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kamareddy and pending adjudication of the said E.P. the respondent authorities have entered the respective shares in the revenue records and also issued pattadar passbooks to some of the co-sharers, without considering the case of the petitioners for issuance of pattadar passbooks. Therefore, the petitioners have submitted a representation before respondent No.3 and vide Lr.No.D2/33/2024-64, dated 08.05.2024, respondent No.3 directed respondent No.4 to examine the application submitted by the petitioners, conduct detailed enquiry and submit a detailed report along with specific remarks on year wise pahani records from Khasra Pahani 1954-55 to till date, verify the names recorded in Manual Pahani with Darani Portal and identify if any persons, whose names have been erroneously recorded for the said land without having any title and also verify the decree passed in O.S.No.727 of 1972 and E.P.No.2 of 2003. The grievance of the petitioners is that even after receiving the said recommendations, respondent No.4 has not considered their case for issuance of pattadar passbooks.

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and with their consent this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that in view of not issuing pattadar passbooks in terms of the final decree in OS.No.727 of 1972, the petitioners are not in a position to enjoy their property and they have not received the investment subsidy as Raithu Bandu, Raithu Barosa and other benefits like fertilizer subsidy for cultivation of the land.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents has submitted that the petitioners have not submitted online application through proper module of Dharani Portal and if such an application has been submitted duly enclosing the relevant documents, the respondents will pass orders in accordance with law.

5. As per Section 7 of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2020 (for short “the ROR Act, 2020”), any person, who acquires right by decree of a Court and seeks to change the entries in Record of Rights, shall apply, through the website prescribed for this purpose, to the Tahsildar for allotting available date and time to appear before the Tahsildar and if such an application being submitted by the decree holder, the Tahsildar is conferred with the powers to carry out the changes to the relevant entries in the Record of Rights instantly, duly deleting the land covered by the decree from the account of the judgement debtor and adding the same to the account of the decree holder where the pattadar and property particulars in the decree are in consonance with the entries in the Record of Rights and on payment of Stamp Duty and Registration fee prescribed as per the Registration Act and the Indian Stamp Act respectively, if not collected by the Court before issue of the Decree and mutation charges prescribed.

6. In view of the above and since it is the case of the petitioners that