THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

WRIT PETITION No.4702 of 2024

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution

of India seeking the following relief/s:-

“…to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4^th respondent in not implementing the directions of the 3^rd respondent passed in File No.B/1510/2006, dated 09.03.2016 by directing the 4^th respondent to conduct denova enquiry in connection with the agricultural lands of the petitioner situated in Sy. No.467/2 (Ac.1.00 gts), Sy.No.466 (Ac.2.27 gts) and Sy.No.465/4 (Ac.1.29 gts) total extent of Ac.5.16 gts situated at Bijwaram Village, Maldakal Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, without considering the representation dated 19.01.2022 of the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent to mutate the petitioner name in online revenue records by deleting the names of the unofficial respondent Nos.4 to 9 from the revenue records by issuing the online PPBs and TTDs in favour of the petitioner in the interest of

justice …”

2. Heard Mr. M. Venkata Narasimha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the father of the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of

the agricultural lands situated in Sy.467/2, admeasuring Ac.1.00 guntas, Sy.No.466, admeasuring Ac.2.27 guntas and Sy.No.465/4, admeasuring Ac.1.29 guntas, total extent of Ac.5.16 guntas situated at Bijwaram Village, Maldakal Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District and the revenue officials are issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in favour of his father vide patta No.911.

4. While the matter stood thus, respondent No.4 – Tahsildar without issuing notice to the father of the petitioner, mutated the names of respondent Nos.5 to 9 in the revenue records. The father of the petitioner and others challenged the said wrong mutation proceedings before respondent No.3 and the same is numbered as File No.B/510/2006, wherein respondent No.3 passed an order dated 09.03.2016 by allowing the appeal, the matter is remanded back to respondent No.4 with a direction to conduct denova enquiry, by duly issuing notices to all the concerned and to take necessary action. The father of the petitioner died on 27.01.2013. After death of his father, the petitioner approached respondent No.4 to implement the direction of respondent No.3 to conduct denova enquiry. But, no action has been taken by respondent No.4.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that on 19.01.2022, the petitioner made a representation before respondent No.2 to direct respondent No.4 to conduct denova enquiry in respect of the agricultural land of the petitioner. Since no action has been taken by respondent Nos.2 to 4, the present writ petition has been filed.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue by furnishing a copy of instructions submitted by the Tahsildar-respondent No.4 would submit that as directed by respondent No.3, respondent No.4 will conduct an enquiry into the subject matter as per relevant provisions of the Telangana Bhu Bharathi (Record of Rights in Land) Act, 2025 and seeks to pass appropriate orders.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and upon perusal of the material placed, and without going into merits or demerits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent No.4 to conduct denova enquiry as expeditiously as possible by issuing notices to all the concerned parties and by affording them sufficient opportunity of hearing and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law.

8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

There shall be no order as to