THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.35343 of 2025

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:-

“…calling for records relating to and connected to the impugned order of respondent No.2 vide Proceedings No.DCORJAN/D1/ROR/0294/2025, dated 25.07.2025 and quash or set aside the same holding it as bad, arbitrary, illegal and violation of natural justice…”

2. Heard Sri Pusapati Subba Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Snehita, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignment appearing for the respondents and with their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the husband of the petitioner by name Mennei Narsinga Rao, S/o. Ramarao, was assigned the land admeasuring Ac.1.20 guntas in Sy.No.237/20, situated at Obulapur Village, Thangallapalli Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District vide Patta Certificate bearing No.1056/96/199 in the month of December, 1996 and her husband’s name was mutated in all the revenue records as pattadar. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the husband of the petitioner died on 29.07.2006 and after his death, the petitioner has succeeded to the said land and her name was mutated in all the revenue records and she was also issued pattadar passbook bearing No.T19090090871 vide Khata No.1263. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, acting on the complaint lodged by one Ramchander Rao, respondent No.2 had called for a report from respondent No.3 and accordingly, respondent No.3 had submitted his report vide Lr.No.B/34/2025, dated 20.06.2025 stating that, on verification of the office records, the amendment register for the year 1997-98 is not available and it is noticed that the husband of the petitioner’s name was brought into records and after his demise, the land was transferred to the name of the petitioner. It is further stated in the report that, during the enquiry, it is found that the husband of the petitioner is a Government servant and he is not a landless poor person and requested to take necessary action. Basing on the said report, respondent No.2 issued the impugned proceedings, dated 25.07.2025 directing respondent No.3 to resume the subject land. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, without issuing any notice to the petitioner in whose favour pattadar passbook was issued and her rights have been effected, the impugned proceedings for resuming the subject land amounts to violation of principles of natural justice.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 would submit that the petitioner ought to have approached the official respondents if she is aggrieved by the impugned proceedings by filing a revision before the appropriate authority but the petitioner, without availing the said remedy, rushed to this Court at a premature stage.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on examination of the impugned order nowhere it is stated that the petitioner is put on notice.

6. A Full Bench of this Court in Chinnam Pandurangam v. Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal and others, AIR 2008 AP 15, had categorically held that, before correction/amendment/ change of the revenue records, a notice has to be issued to the interested persons, whose names are reflected in the revenue records. 7. In the instant case also, the name of the petitioner was found in all the revenue records and she was also issued pattadar passbook under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2020 but no notice was issued to her before passing the impugned order directing the Tahsildar to resume the subject land. Therefore, it is a clear case of violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings be