HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15332 of 2022

ORDER:

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

“….to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondent No.2 herein in mutating the name of unofficial respondent in the Revenue Records in respect of lands owned by petitioner as a pattedar i.e., Sy.No.262/A1/1 admeasuring Acs.3.37 guntas situated at Medipally Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also the Provisions of ROR Act.…”

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

3. It is the case of the petitioner that his father was the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.2.37 guntas in Sy.No.262/A/1 situated at Medipally Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and his name was also recorded in all the revenue records as pattadars; and after the death of his father, he has acquired the said property by way of succession. The grievance of the petitioner is that relying upon the alleged sale deeds vide Nos.11257 and 11258 of 2005, the respondent authorities have illegally mutated the name of respondent No.4 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.4; 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.4 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 & others, AIR 2008 AP 15 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. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if respondent No.3 is directed to conduct fresh enquiry within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner satisfies all the requirements of his ownership in respect of the subject property, the respondents are directed to take steps for cancellation of the pattadar passbooks in favour of respondent No.4; and if the petitioner fails to establish his rights over the subject property, the respondents shall pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner. Till such time, the parties are directed to maintain status quo existing as on today, in respect of the subject property, in all respects.

6. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J Date: 10.02.2025 sus