HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITON No.12032 OF 2024 DATE: 11-03-2026 Between:

Mr. S. Raghava Reddy and six (6) others.

... Petitioners AND The State of Telangana Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and five (05) others.

... Respondents ORDER : (ORAL)

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to declare the action of respondent No.2 in passing impugned order in Appeal No.Rev/F1/TNCY/INAM/0001/2024 (E-56905) dated 10.04.2024, as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and provisions of the Telangana Abolition of Inams Act 1955 (for short ‘Act 1955’).

2. It is submitted that petitioner Nos.1 to 3, legal heir of petitioner No.4 i.e., petitioner No.5 and petitioner Nos.6 and 7 are legal heirs of original protected tenants (PTs) namely, Mr. Pedda Pullappan and Mr. Chinna Pullappa. The names of Mr. Pedda Pullappa and Mr. Chinna Pullappa were recorded as PTs in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.7-04 guntas out of Acs.16-11 guntas of Survey No.350 of Pothanpally H/o. Kotakadira Village, Mahbabubnagar Rural Mandal and Mahabubnagar District. The petitioners have inherited the PT rights under the provisions of the Telangana Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1950 (for short ‘Act 1950’), as such they are eligible for grant of Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC) under the provisions of the Act 1955.

3. It is stated that originally owner of the said land is Mr. Chenna Reddy (Chinna) Reddy S/o. Rajaragupathi Reddy, whose name was recorded as occupant. However, petitioners are in possession of the subject land and they are entitled for grant of ORC under the provisions of the Act 1955. The petitioners submitted application before respondent No.3 in the year 2023 for grant of ORC. Having conducted enquiry by affording opportunity of hearing to petitioners and respondent Nos.5 and 6, respondent No.3 has passed order vide proceedings No.K/6653/2023 dated

20.12.2023 registering the ORC in favour of the petitioners subject to the payment of premium of Rs.21,000/- under Section 4(2) of the Act 1955. That being aggrieved by the order dated 20.12.2023 of the respondent No.3, respondent Nos.5 and 6 preferred appeal before respondent No.2 in Appeal No.Rev/F1/TNCY/INAM /0001/2024 (E-56905). Respondent No.2 passed the impugned order dated 10.04.2024 setting aside the ORC issued by respondent No.3 in favour of the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that ORC has to be decided on the basis of crucial date i.e., 01.11.1973. The nature of the said land as on 01.11.1973 is relevant. The petitioners and their family members had been in personal cultivation of the subject land prior to 01.11.1973 and subsequent to 01.11.1973. Respondent No.2 solely relied upon pahani for the years 2008-09 whereby the subject land is shown as ‘covered by houses’/ ‘house sites’. Learned counsel further submitted that thorough enquiry was conducted by respondent No.3 by physically inspecting the subject land before granting ORC in favour of the petitioners. The Survey No.350 is a large extent and so far as subject land of the petitioners is concerned it is an agricultural land and they are cultivating the said land. Thus, impugned order is in violation of principles of natural justice and liable to be set aside.

5. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6 referred to the counter affidavit and submitted that late Mr. Chinna Reddy, grandfather of respondent No.5 was the original pattadar of the land admeasuring Acs.5-16 guntas in Survey No.349, Acs.16-14 guntas in Survey No.350, Acs.17-10 guntas in Survey No.351, Acs.0-38 guntas in Survey No.352 situated at Pothanpally Village, H/o. Kotakadira Village, Mahabubnagar Rural Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. The grandfather of respondent No.5 was cultivating the lands through Mr. Pedda Pullappa and Mr. Chinna Pullappa on crop share basis. Hence, they we