Aitipamula Vittal vs Smt Aitipamula Chinna Narsamma
2023 Latest Caselaw 491 Tel

          THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                             AND
                  THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
                                   W.A.No. 134 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)

        Heard Mr. S.Rama Mohan Rao, learned counsel for the

appellants; Mr. K.Buchi Babu, learned counsel for respondent

No.1/writ petitioner; and Mr. T.Srikanth Reddy, learned

Government Pleader for Revenue representing respondents No.2

to 5.

2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 25.11.2022

passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of W.P.No.42638

of 2022 filed by respondent No.1 as the writ petitioner.

3. Respondent No.1 had filed the related writ petition seeking a

direction to respondents No.2 to 5 for issuance of new patadar

passbooks in respect of two different extents of land admeasuring

Ac.1.16 guntas in Survey No.269 and Acs.5.00 in Survey

No.488/AA situated at Valigonda Village and Mandal, Yadadri-

Bhongir District (briefly 'subject land' hereinafter).

::2::

4. Before the learned Single Judge, it was contended that

though respondent No.1 had submitted written representation

dated 10.06.2020 before the Revenue Divisional Officer,

Choutuppal (respondent No.4) with a request to mutate her name

and issue e-pattadar passbooks in respect of the subject land, no

effective steps were taken by the said authority, compelling her to

approach the Court.

5. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue submitted before

the learned Single Judge that respondent No.1 has to make online

application before the District Collector. If the same is done,

District Collector will consider the online application and pass

appropriate order thereafter.

6. On the above basis, learned Single Judge passed the order

dated 25.11.2022 in the following manner:

4. It is relevant to note that in supersession of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, 1971 (Act. No.26 of l97l), the State promulgated the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, 2020 (Act. No.9 of 2020) simplified procedure of ::3::

entries in revenue records and confined to three circumstances in revenue records i.e., sale/gift/ mortgage/succession/survivorship/inheritance and by way of court decree.

5. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to make online application to the 2nd respondent in terms of the aforesaid circular and on receipt of the said online application, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law by putting the petitioner and all other effected parties on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. If the 2nd respondent is not inclined to accept the request made by the petitioner, he shall assign reasons and pass a reasoned order. He shall communicate the said order to the petitioner herein and he shall complete the entire exercise within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the said online application.

7. From the above, we find that learned Single Judge has

granted liberty to respondent No.1 to make an online application

before the District Collector for mutation of her name in the

revenue record and for issuance of pattadar passbooks in respect of ::4::

the subject land. The District Collector has been directed that

while considering such online application, he shall put not only

respondent No.1 on notice but all other effected parties and after

affording them an opportunity of hearing, he should do the needful

in accordance with law.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there was

suppression of material facts by respondent No.1 while filing the

writ petition; the fact that there is a partition suit with an injunction

order in place in respect of the subject land was not brought to the

notice of the learned Single Judge. However, on a query by the

Court, he submits that Tahsildar has now issued notice, which was

served upon his clients after filing of the writ appeal.

8. Without expressing any opinion on the contentions urged by

learned counsel for the appellants, we are of the view that order of

the learned Single Judge sufficiently protects the interests of all the

contesting parties including the appellants. Now that notice has

been issued by the Tahsildar on the basis of the order of the ::5::

learned Single Judge, we are of the view that interference at this

stage would not be justified.

9. Consequently, we decline to entertain the writ appeal. It is

accordingly dismissed. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand

closed.

__________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 31.01.2023 LUR