Telangana High Court
Parnandi Raghupathi Sharma vs The Government Of Telangana And 9 Others on 1 May, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.10271 of 2021
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed questioning the order passed
by the respondent No.2 in New Case
No.F3/Spl.Tribunal/Cherial/013/2021 dated 03.02.2021
as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Ashok
Reddy Kanathala, learned counsel for the respondent
Nos.6,8 to 10.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
father of petitioner and his brother have sold the joint
family property admeasuring to an extent of Ac.13.13 gts in
different survey numbers situated at Nagapuri Village,
Cherial Mandal, Warangal District, to others under various
sale deeds without notice and knowledge of the petitioner
and the names of the purchasers were incorporated in the
revenue records illegally. The petitioner and others have
SK, J
filed suit in O.S.No.4 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil
Judge, Jangoan, for partition and declaration. Thereafter,
the matter was settled before the Lok Adalat and
preliminary decree was passed in LAC No.213 of 2013
dated 23.11.2013 and subsequently a final decree was also
passed on 25.07.2015. On the basis of final decree, the
petitioner has applied before the Tahsildar to effect
mutation in the revenue records and to grant pattadar
passbooks and title deeds for his share of land. Thereafter,
he filed W.P.Nos.5510 of 2016 and W.P.No.39830 of 2016
and as per the directions of this Court, the respondent
No.5-Tahsildar has passed order dated 09.08.2016
directing mutation of the records incorporating the name of
petitioner in the place of the respondent Nos.6 to 10. In the
meantime, the respondent Nos.6 to 10 have filed I.A.No.214
of 2016 before the Civil Court to set aside the final decree
granted by the Lok Adalat on the ground that they were not
served with notice and the same was allowed by setting
aside the final decree dated 25.07.2015 vide order
dated 28.07.2017. Against the said order, the petitioner
SK, J
filed C.R.P.No.3306 of 2018 and the same was dismissed on
03.04.2019.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits
that challenging the order of the Tahsildar
dated 09.08.2016, the respondent Nos.6 to 10 filed appeal
before the Revenue Divisional Officer and the same was
dismissed on 30.08.2018. Against the said order, the
respondent Nos.6 to 10 filed revision before the respondent
No.3-Joint Collector, Siddipet, which was transferred to the
Special Tribunal and the same was allowed by the
impugned order on 03.02.2021. He submits that the
Special Tribunal failed to follow the rules as contemplated
under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass
Book Act, 2020 for mutation of the names and passed order
without recording any findings and if any order passed by
the Civil Court in respect of the final decree, the
respondents shall approach the Tahsildar under Section 7
of the Act, 2020. He further submits that the impugned
order is a non-speaking order passed by the Special
SK, J
Tribunal without jurisdiction and requested to allow the
writ petition by setting aside the impugned order.
5. Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.6,8 to 10
based on the counter submits that as the final decree
passed by the Lok Adalat was set aside by order
dated 28.07.2017 in I.A.No.214 of 2016 in I.A.No.529 of
2015 in O.S.No.4 of 2007 on the file of Senior Civil Judge,
Jangaon, and the same was also confirmed by this Court in
C.R.P.No.3306 of 2018 dated 03.04.2019, the petitioner has
no right to claim any right or title till the final decree is
passed by the Civil Court and the Special Tribunal has
rightly allowed the revision by the impugned order and
there is no need to interfere with by this Court and
requested to dismiss the writ petition.
6. After hearing both sides and perusal of the record, this
Court is of the considered view that the petitioner and
others filed suit in O.S.No.4 of 2007 on the file of Senior
Civil Judge, Jangaon, against the respondent Nos.6 to 10
and others for partition and declaration and the same was
SK, J
referred to Lok Adalat, wherein preliminary decree was
passed in LAC No.213 of 2013 dated 23.11.2013.Thereafter,
a final decree was passed on 25.07.2015. Challenging the
said final decree, the respondent Nos.6 to 10 filed
I.A.No.214 of 2016 in I.A.No.529 of 2015 in O.S.No.4 of
2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon, and the
same was allowed on 28.07.2017 by setting aside the final
decree on the ground that no notice was served on the
petitioners i.e., respondent Nos.6 to 10 herein, in the final
decree petition in I.A.No.529 of 2015 and the drafting of the
final decree is not in terms of the preliminary decree. The
said order was also confirmed by this Court in C.R.P.
No.3306 of 2018 dated 03.04.2019.
7. The mutation proceedings have taken place in favour
of the petitioner basing on the final decree passed in
O.S.No.4 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge,
Janagaon dated 25.07.2015 and thereafter, the petitoner
has approached this Court and filed W.P.No.5510 of 2016
and W.P.No.39830 of 2016 and the same were disposed of
SK, J
directing the Tahsildar to mutate the revenue records as
per the final decree passed in O.S.No.4 of 2007. After
passing of the said decree, the unofficial respondents
herein filed I.A.No.214 of 2016 in I.A.No.529 of 2015 in
O.S.No.4 of 2007 and the same was ordered by setting
aside the final decree in O.S.No.4 of 2007. In view of the
same, there is no basis for granting mutation in favour of
the writ petitioner by the Tahsildar.
8. In the earlier round of litigation, the petitioner has
approached this Court and obtained orders stating that the
competent Civil Court has passed the final decree
proceedings and this Court also directed the respondents to
mutate the name of the petitioner herein. After mutation of
the records, the unofficial respondents have approached the
revenue authorities by filing appeal before the Revenue
Divisional Officer and thereafter, revision petition and the
same was transferred to the Special Tribunal. The Special
Tribunal has rightly allowed the revision petition by setting
aside the mutation proceedings in favour of the petitioner
SK, J
on the ground that the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.4 of
2007 was set aside and the same was confirmed by this
Court in C.R.P.No.3306 of 2018 dated 03.04.2019. The
Special Tribunal has allowed the revision petition filed by
the unofficial respondents and there is no valid ground to
interfere with the same as the petitioner has failed to obtain
any favorable orders from the competent Civil Court as on
this date for mutation of records in his favour. If the
petitioner has succeeded in the partition and declaration
suit, he can approach the revenue authorities for mutation
of the records basing on the Judgment and Decree. Till
obtaining the valid Judgment and Decree in favour of the
petitioner, the respondents cannot continue the mutation
granted in favour of the petitioner without any basis.
9. In view of the above circumstances, there are no
merits in the present writ petition to set aside the
impugned proceedings and this Court is not inclined to
interfere with the order of the Special Tribunal and the writ
petition is liable to be dismissed.
SK, J
10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order
as to costs.
11. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ
petition shall stand closed.
______________________
JUSTICE K.SARATH
Date:01.05.2025
sj
