SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 63627

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
Girepgari Balaiah – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 35250/2025



THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.35250 of 2025

ORDER:

Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.3 in not considering the representation dated 28.03.2025 to cancel mutation application made by respondent No.5 pertaining to the land in Survey No.277 to an extent of Ac.4-20 guntas situated at Raikode Village of Narva Mandal, Narayanpet District, the present writ petition is filed. A consequential prayer is sought to direct respondent No.3 to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 28.03.2025.

2. Heard Ms. Shaheena, learned counsel representing Mr. G.Rajeshwar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner on record and Mr. L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the claimant to the property in Survey No.277/A to an extent of Ac.4-20 guntas situated at Raikode Village of Narva Mandal, Narayanpet District, through succession. It is further submitted that when the petitioner approached the revenue authorities, it is observed that in the Dharani Portal, an application is made by respondent No.5 for mutation of the said property vide application No.250003320 and the same is reflecting in the nature of application as “mutation”.

Accordingly, the petitioner filed the objection petition seeking to reject the said mutation application filed by respondent No.5. But no action has been taken so far and status of the online application is showing as “pending at RDO”. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner is constrained to file this writ petition seeking appropriate directions.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue on the other hand submitted that the case of the petitioner shall be considered by the official respondent No.3 on the application filed for mutation by unofficial respondent No.5 vide application No.2500003320 and further submitted that after granting sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, necessary orders would be passed and seeks to pass appropriate orders.

5. This Court having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and on perusing and examining the material placed before this Court, deems it appropriate to direct official respondent No.3 to consider the petitioner’s case, by issuing notice to all concerned / interested parties including the unofficial respondent No.5 and after affording sufficient opportunity of hearing, pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law.

6. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Since notice to unofficial respondent is directed to be issued, further notice to the unofficial respondent No.5 in this writ petition is hereby dispensed with.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications if any pending in this petition, shall stand closed.

____________________ E.V.VENUGOPAL, J

Date: 20.11.2025

Nsk

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top