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) 71469

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
Parvathi Bapu And Another – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana And 3 Others – Respondent
WP 8451/2021



THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.8451 OF 2021

ORDER :

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in deleting the names of the petitioners from the revenue records, to the extent of Ac.0.0975 guntas each in Sy. No. 421/3/1 and Sy. No. 421/3, situated at Sabbepally Revenue Village, Hazipur Mandal, Mancherial District, without issuing any notice and without following the procedure contemplated under law, as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional; and consequently, to set aside the proceedings in Memo and consequential Order No. B/244/2020, dated 29.07.2020, and Proceeding No. B/117/2013, dated 16.11.2013; and further direct the 4th respondent to re-incorporate the names of the petitioners as pattadars of the above-mentioned land under their possession.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that: i) the father of the petitioners and his brother, i.e., Late Parvathi Pochaiah S/o Chandraiah and Parvathi Bhumaiah S/o Chandraiah, were the absolute joint owners and possessors of agricultural land to an extent of Ac.6.03¾ guntas in Sy. No. 421, situated at Sabbepally Revenue Village, Hazipur Mandal, Mancherial District. Subsequently, the said property was partitioned between them during the year 2000–2001. In the said partition, the petitioners' father, Parvathi Pochaiah, was allotted land to an extent of Ac.4.00 guntas in Sy. No. 421, while Parvathi Bhumaiah was allotted land to an extent of Ac.2.33¼ guntas in Sy. No. 421/1.

ii) During his lifetime, the petitioners' father alienated a portion of the land to various individuals through registered conveyance deeds. He passed away in the year 2007, leaving behind the petitioners as his legal heirs and land to an extent of Ac.0.1950 guntas in Sy. No. 421/3, which continued to be reflected in the revenue records as per the ROR 1-B until 2017.

iii) Based on an application made by the petitioners, the

4th respondent issued Proceedings No. ROR/6A/Sabbepalli/265/2017, dated 12.12.2017, mutating their names as successors to the extent of Ac.0.0975 guntas each. Accordingly, the petitioners have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said land. The 4th respondent also issued new Pattadar Passbooks in favour of the petitioners on 25.04.2018 in respect of land to an extent of Ac.0.0975 guntas each, with a new sub-division number Sy. No.421/3/2, and their names were duly reflected in the revenue records.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that, while the matter stood thus, the petitioners came to know that their land, which continued to be in their name as on the date of the order passed by the 4th respondent vide Proceedings No. B/244/2020, dated 29.07.2020, had been deleted from the revenue records. The deletion was made on the ground that one Parvathi Bhumaiah S/o Chandraiah had sold Ac.1.00 guntas of land in Sy. No. 421/3, situated at Sabbepally Village, in favour of one Gaddam Mondaiah, through a registered sale deed bearing Document No. 3213/2002, and consequently, the name of Gaddam Mondaiah came to be reflected in the revenue records. He submits that, without issuing any notice to the petitioners, the name of one Pampad Satyanarayana was ordered to be entered in the revenue records in respect of the land belonging to the petitioners. Such action is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as the rights of the petitioners were unilaterally and arbitrarily removed by the official respondents. Hence, he seeks the indulgence of this Hon’ble Court to set aside the impugned proceedings.

4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, upon instructions, submitted that the 4th respondent passed the impugned order based on the Circular issued by the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration vide Lr. No. ROR/128/99, dated 14.10.1999. In the said circular, it has been clearly clarified that correct

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