IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT: HYDERABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN DATE: 06-03-2026 Between Mr. Singireddy Balavantha Reddy & another .. Petitioners Vs.

Mrs. V.V.L. Chandrakala & another .. Respondents This Court made the following:

ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Mr. D. Ramakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Tekuru Swetcha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful and deliberate violation of order dated 23.09.2025 in W.P. No.28819 of 2025.

3. Vide the aforesaid order, this Court disposed of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioners to submit an online application with respondent No.3 in terms of Bhu Bharati Rules, 2025 along with all relevant documents with a request to correct wrong entries and issue e-pattadar passbooks in their names, and on receipt of the same, this Court directed respondent No.3 - Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Gajwel, Siddipet District, to consider and dispose of it in accordance with law within 60 days.

4. It is the specific contention of the petitioners that in compliance with the said order, the petitioners have submitted online application dated 25.11.2025 to respondent No.1 herein. Even then, respondent No.2 herein - the Tahsildar, Gajwel Mandal, Siddipet District rejected the said application vide endorsement dated 06.12.2025. The RDO, Gajwel has issued a notice dated 20.02.2026 fixing the enquiry on 25.02.2026 at 11.00 A.M. It is pending. Thus, according to learned counsel for the petitioners, both the respondents have violated the order under contempt willfully and deliberately.

5. Whereas, Ms. Tekuru Swetcha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, referring to Rule - 7 of the Telangana Bhu Bharati (Record of Rights in Land) Rules, 2025, would submit that it is the Tahsildar, who is the competent authority to consider the online application submitted by the petitioners in respect of mutation by way of succession. Therefore, the Tahsildar has already issued endorsement dated 06.12.2025. However, without knowing the said fact, the RDO has issued notice dated 20.02.2026 fixing enquiry on 25.02.2026. The RDO will inform the petitioners with regard to the endorsement dated 06.12.2025 issued by the Tahsildar, Gajwel.

6. It is also apt to note that the petitioners herein have filed earlier contempt vide C.C. No.958 of 2026, and vide order dated 27.02.2026 considering the submission made by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue that respondent No.2 has already issued endorsement dated 06.12.2025, this Court closed the said Contempt Case.

7. To punish the respondents - contemnors in terms of Sections - 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, there shall be willful and deliberate violation of the order.

8. In the light of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that there is no violation, much less willful and deliberate violation of the order under contempt by the respondents herein.

9. Therefore, this Contempt Case is closed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to challenge the endorsement dated 06.12.2025 of the Tahsildar, Gajwel Mandal, and to inform respondent No.1 about the said endorsement and to request for closure of the enquiry. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Contempt Case shall stand closed.

_________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J

6^th March, 2026 Mgr