THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.31650 of 2025

ORDER :

The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 4^th respondent Tahsildar in effecting mutation of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.6.20 gts., comprising Ac.2.37 gts. in Sy.No.33/AA/1, Ac.2.03 gts. in Sy.No.40/A/2, Ac.0.30 gts. in Sy.No.43/A/2/A, Ac.0.16 gts. in Sy.No.64 and Ac.0.14 gts. in Sy.No.65, situated at Arutla Village, Kandi Mandal, Sangareddy District, in favour of the 5^th respondent and issuing pattadar pass book bearing No.T09080010653, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the Telangana Bhu-Bharathi Records of Rights in Land Act, 2025.

2. Heard N.Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Surender Rao and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of learned Government Pleader for Revenue Sri K.Muralidhar Reddy.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition challenging the action of the 4^th respondent–Tahsildar in mutating agricultural land admeasuring Ac.6.20 gts., comprising Ac.2.37 gts. in Sy.No.33/AA/1, Ac.2.03 gts. in Sy.No.40/A/2, Ac.0.30 gts. in Sy.No.43/A/2/A, Ac.0.16 gts. in Sy.No.64, and Ac.0.14 gts. in Sy.No.65 of Arutla Village, Kandi Mandal, Sangareddy District, in favour of the 5th respondent and issuing Pattadar Pass Book No.T09080010653, without considering the petitioner’s representations dated 27.04.2025, 06.05.2025 and legal notice dated 19.08.2025.

(a) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that such action is illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the Telangana Bhu-Bharathi (Records of Rights in Land) Act, 2025. Further, the petitioner’s late father, Sri Venkat Reddy, was the absolute owner and possessor of the said agricultural lands and died intestate on 07.08.2022, leaving behind his wife the 5^th respondent herein, the petitioner and his sister, Smt.P.Swarnalatha, as his legal heirs. Another daughter, Smt.P.Hemalatha, had predeceased him, leaving two daughters, Kum.Nikhila and Kum.Nichhala, as her legal heirs. The petitioner upon learning about the proposed mutation of the lands solely in the name of the 5^th respondent, submitted representations dated 27.04.2025 and 06.05.2025, requesting that the mutation not be effected without the consent of all legal heirs. As no action was taken, he issued a legal notice dated 19.08.2025 to respondents 2 to 4. It is alleged that the 4^th respondent, ignoring these objections, proceeded to mutate the property and issued the pattadar pass book in the name of the 5^th respondent.

(b) The petitioner relies upon Section 7 of the Bhu-Bharathi Act, 2025, which mandates submission of a joint statement by all legal heirs in cases of intestate succession while seeking mutation. It is contended that the 4^th respondent failed to adhere to the said statutory procedure and effected mutation without obtaining a joint statement from all legal heirs, thereby acting in violation of Section 7 of the Act and the principles of natural justice. The petitioner asserts that the said mutation and issuance of the pattadar pass book are illegal, arbitrary, and liable to be set aside.

(c) It is further alleged that the 5^th respondent, taking advantage of the impugned mutation and pattadar pass book issued in her favour, is attempting to alienate the subject lands to third parties. The petitioner seeks intervention of this Court to safeguard his lawful rights and prevent irreparable loss.

4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, appearing for the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, submits that the 4^th respondent Tahsildar acted strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Telangana Bhu-Bharathi (Records of Rights in Land) Act, 2025 and the rul