HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9611 of 2025

ORDER:

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

“….to issue Writ or direction preferably WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 issuing Pattadar Passbook in favour of Respondent No.5 for the land Petitioner s land in Sy.No.602/A/1 Admeasuring Ac.0.38 gts situated at Janwada Village, Shankerpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District without following due process of law and without issuing any notice and inspite of pendency of W.P.No.33674 of 2024 before this Hon’ble Court as well as O.S.No.114/2024 on the file of Junior Civil Judge Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class Ranga Reddy District at Chevella as illegal arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 forthwith cancel the Pattadar Passbook issued in favour of the Respondent No.5 in Sy.No.602/A/1 Admeasuring Ac.0.38 gts situated at Janwada Village, Shankerpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and pass.…”

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s mother-in- law Amena Begum (late) is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.1.17 guntas in Sy.No.602/A, Ac.1.35 guntas in Sy.No.602/AA i.e., a total extent of Ac.3.12 guntas situated at Janwada Village, Shankerpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is stated that the petitioner however acquired the said property under the registered Gift Settlement Deed vide Doc.No.8191 of 1996. Thereafter, the disputes arose over the subject property. When respondent No.5 started disputing the right and title, the petitioner was constrained to file a writ petition vide W.P.No.33674 of 2024 on the file of this Court. Pending adjudication of the said writ petition, respondent No.5 has filed a Suit for partition vide O.S.No.114 of 2024 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at Chevella. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after submitting representation informing about the pendency of the W.P.No.33674 of 2024 and O.S.No.114 of 2024, the respondent authorities have illegally mutated the name of respondent No.5 in the revenue records and consequently issued Pattadar passbooks in respect of the subject property, which action on the part of the respondents is illegal and arbitrary.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that respondent No.3-the Tahsildar has not issued any notice under Section 5(3) of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act, 1971’) to the persons, who are in possession of the subject property before mutating the name of the respondent No.5; and under Rule 26 Sub-rule (6) of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989 (for short, 'the ROR Rules'), pattadar pass books shall be issued only to those who are in actual possession of the land and as such, respondent No.5 is not entitled for issuance of pattadar pass books and title deeds in his favour, therefore, the said action on the part of respondent No.3 amounts to violation of the law laid down by this Court in Chinnam Pandurangam v. Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal & others1, wherein this Court has observed that before initiating any proceedings, a notice has to be issued to all the interested persons over the subject property.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 submitted that either in the writ petition instituted by the petitioner or in the Suit pending before the Civil Court, there are no interim orders restraining the respondents from entertaining the application submitted by respondent No.5 either for granting mutation or consequential issuance of Pattadar Passbooks. The mere pendency of the cases does not take away the power of the