IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY Dated:13.03.2026 WP.No.25468 of 2019 Between:

Vaddi Gopal Reddy …Petitioner And The State of Telangana, reptd., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, and four others.

…Respondents

COMMON ORDER

Writ Petition No.25468 of 2019 is filed to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos.1 to 4 in not issuing digital pattadar pass books and title deeds in respect of the petitioner's patta lands admeasuring Ac.1-28 gts, in Sy.No.375/2 and Acs.3-16 gts, in Sy.No.375/a, total admeasuring Acs.5-04 gts, situated at Yacharam Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, on the basis of the letter of respondent No.5, as bad, illegal and arbitrary, and for consequential relief.

2. Writ Petition No.25471 of 2019 is filed to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos.1 to 4 in not issuing digital pattadar pass books and title deeds in respect of the petitioner's patta lands admeasuring Ac.1-28 gts in Sy.No.375/2 situated at Yacharam Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, on the basis of letter of respondent No.5, as bad, illegal and arbitrary, and for consequential relief.

3. Writ Petition No.25532 of 2019 is filed to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos.1 to 4 in not issuing digital pattada pass books and title deeds in respect of the petitioner's patta land admeasuring Ac.3-16 gts, in Sy.No.375/3 situated at Yacharam Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, on the basis of the letter of respondent No.5, as bad, illegal and arbitrary, and for consequential relief.

4. Since the subject matter of the property in all the Writ Petitions forms part of the same Survey Number, and that the relief sought for and the issue involved are same, all the Writ Petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

5. Heard Sri H.Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Kiran Kumar Gattu, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5.

6. Brief facts of the case as averred in writ affidavit are that it is the case of the petitioners that they are the owners, pattadars and possessors of their respective extents of land, as mentioned hereinabove, having purchased the same, under various registered sale deeds executed in their favour in the year 2006, from the legal heirs of one Vanguru Mallaiah; that they are in possession and enjoyment of their respective lands by cultivating the same and their names are incorporated in the Pahani Patrikas/Adangals, 1-B proceedings under the Record of Rights Act and that pattadar passbooks and title deeds were also issued.

6.1. It is further averred that the name of predecessor-in-title of the petitioners' vendor, i.e., Vanguru Mallaiah was recorded in possessor column in Khasra Pahani for the year 1954-55, and Chowfasla Khasra for the year 1955-58, in respect of the said lands.

6.2. It is further averred that while so, the petitioners submitted several representations to the revenue authorities for issuance of digital pattadar passbooks and title deeds to them in respect of the subject lands and also requested to pay the amount under "Rythu Bandhu” Scheme, however, revenue authorities neglected to act on the said representations and aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed W.P.No.1477 of 2019 seeking a direction to revenue authorities to issue e-pattadar passbooks; that the said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court, vide order dated 29.01.2019, permitting the petitioners to make individual applications afresh for issuance of e-pattadar passbooks for their separate extents of land; that accordingly, the petitioners submitted separate applications, but, respondent No.4-Tahsildar by a common endorsement dated 14.11.2019 rejected their applications basing on the list of lands furnished by respondent No.5, stating that the subject lands, totally admeasuring Acs.10-08 g