HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

ORAL ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. L. Ravinder,

learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for

respondent Nos.1 to 4.

2. The petitioner herein is claiming that his father purchased

the land admeasuring Ac.0.11 guntas in Survey No.306/ఆ, situated at Masanpally Village, Kalher Mandal, Sangareddy District under a sada bainama dated 26.09.1984 executed by Mrs. Chintakayala Ramavva W/o Papaiah i.e., mother of respondent No.4 herein. She has handed over the said original sada bainama to the Village Revenue Officer (VRO) to get regularize the subject land as per the Scheme announced by the Government for regularization of sada bainama. He has not pursued the same. Therefore, the petitioner is not in a position to get regularization of the subject property and the sada bainama dated 26.09.1984. After the death of his father, the petitioner herein succeeded the subject property. Taking advantage of the revenue entries, respondent No.4 is trying to alienate the subject property in favour of third parties. Therefore, the petitioner submitted objections

dated 18.07.2025 to respondent No.1. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said objections, respondent No.1 did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent No.1, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3. Though the petitioner is contending that his father handed over the sada bainama to the VRO for regularization, who was transferred, his father was not in a position to get the said sada bainama regularized. After the death of his father, the petitioner remains silent. Without getting the said sada bainama dated 26.09.1984, the petitioner cannot seek any relief. He has to establish his right over the subject property, then he has to approach respondent No.1 for implementation of the same. Without doing so, the petitioner cannot submit objections dated 18.07.2025 to respondent No.1 and file present writ petition alleging non-consideration of the said objections. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief, much less the relief sought in the present writ petition. Thus, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

4. The present writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out alternative remedies. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.

_________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J

6^th August, 2025 Mgr