IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.19745 of 2023 DATED: 18.11.2025 Between:

Chilkuri Lakshmi & 3 others …Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Spl.Chief Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and four others.

…Respondents

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to call for the records in case No.F1/1937/2022, dated 10.05.2023, and quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Telangana Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act 1955’).

2. Heard Sri B.Mahender Reddy, learned Counsel for petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and 6, Ms.Pratyusha Boppanna, learned Counsel for respondent No.5 and Sri K.Ravi Mahendar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.8 to 10.

3. Brief facts of the case as averred in the writ affidavit are that originally great grandfather of petitioner Nos.2 to 4 i.e., Chilkuri Balaiah was the Inamdar of the land admeasuring Acs.5 – 04 gts in Sy.No.26 and Acs.2 – 19 gts in Sy.No.27 of Pet Basheerabad village (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject lands’) and his name was also recorded as ‘Inamdar’ in the revenue records; that in the Khasra Pahani for the year 1954-55, the name of Chilkuri Balaiah was recorded as Pattadar/Inamdar and the names of his sons Durgaiah, Chinna Lachaiah and Lachaiah were recorded as Hissadars; that in the pahanies for the years 1972-73 and 1973-74, the name of Chilkuri Narsimha was recorded as cultivator in the possessors column; that during the life time of Chilkuri Durgaiah and Chilkuri Narsimha, they neither obtained the Occupancy Rights Certificate (for short ‘ORC’) nor alienated the same to third parties. However, third parties are trying to encroach upon the subject lands and therefore, the petitioners approached respondent No.4 and submitted an application dated 01.12.2021, for issuance of ORC in respect of subject lands; that respondent No.4 vide Order dated 23.07.2022 in case No.J/645/2021, rejected the application without properly considering the provisions of the Act, with an observation that the subject lands have been mutated in the name of respondent No.5 in the year 1985 and the said lands were converted into non-agriculture in 1996 and that petitioners were neither in occupation nor cultivating the lands, as such the same has to be considered under Section 9 of the Act.

4. It is further averred that aggrieved by the Order dated 23.07.2022, petitioners preferred an appeal before respondent No.2 vide case No.F1/1937/2022 and the same was allotted to respondent No.3 for adjudication; that respondent No.3 dismissed the appeal vide impugned Order dated 10.05.2023, with an observation that third parties are in possession, petitioners cannot turn around and fall back on the provisions of the Act and further observed that the subject lands have been converted to non-agricultural purpose and a layout was also approved by the Municipal Commissioner, Quthbullapur Municipality vide layout No.12090/P2/H/90, dated 02.09.1996 and third party rights have been created. Aggrieved by the proceedings dated 10.05.2023, present writ petition is filed.

5. Learned Counsel for petitioners would submit that petitioners are the legal heirs and successors of the Inamdar, who was personally cultivating the lands as on the crucial date i.e., 01.11.1973, which is relevant for issuance of ORC. He further submitted that conversion of lands to non-agricultural purpose in the year 1996 is immaterial, since the status of lands as on 01.11.1973 only has to be considered while adjudicating the application for issuance of ORC. He further submitted that any alienation made without obtaining ORC is null and void and inoperative, in view of Full Bench Judgment dated 21.11.2022 in W.P.No.913 of 2002 and batch. He also submitted that all inams have been abolished in the State of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana as