Telangana High Court
Kona Naveen vs The State Of Telangana on 4 November, 2025
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
AND
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
I.A.No.1 OF 2025
IN/AND
WRIT APPEAL No.1213 OF 2025
Mr.A.Praneeth, learned counsel representing Mr.P.Lakshma Reddy, learned counsel appearing
for the appellant.
Ms.Dara Haritha Kiran, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the
respondent Nos.1 to 4.
COMMON JUDGMENT:
(Per Hon'ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)
1. The Writ Appeal arises out of an order dated 09.09.2025
in W.P.No.891 of 2022 passed by a learned Single Judge
wherein the Writ Petition filed by the appellant/petitioner was
disposed of by giving liberty to the appellant/petitioner to
submit a fresh application ventilating his grievance before the
respondent No.4/Tahsildar and Joint Sub Registrar, Luxettipet
Mandal, Mancherial District in accordance with the procedure
laid down by law and also directing the respondent No.4 to
consider and dispose of the said application in accordance with
law and pass appropriate orders within a period of six months
thereafter.
2. The appellant/petitioner had filed the Writ Petition
seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the
respondent No.4 i.e., the Succession Summary dated
08.10.2021 in granting succession of the lands in Sy.No.50/6 to
an extent of Acs.2.00 Guntas and Sy.No.90/1 to an extent of
Ac.0.14 Guntas both situated at Jendavenkatpur Village,
Luxettipet Mandal, Mancherial District in favour of the
respondent No.5/ K.Rajaiah as being illegal, arbitrary, in patent
violation of the principles of natural justice, contrary to the
provisions of The Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass
Books Act, 2020 as well as that of The Indian Succession Act,
1925 and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of The
Constitution of India. The appellant/petitioner also prayed for
setting aside the entries in respect of the said lands in the
respondent No.5's E-Pattadar Pass Book cum Title Deed vide
number T15120050111 and for directing the respondent No.4 to
revert the entries in respect of the said lands in the name of the
original pattadar and consequently set aside the same. The
appellant/petitioner's contention therein was that the granting
of the said lands in favour of the respondent No.5 was contrary
to the Will Deed executed by the original pattadar and had been
done without issuing any notice or opportunity to the
appellant/petitioner and also without considering the
appellant/petitioner's objection dated 04.10.2021.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ petitioner
submits that the learned Single Judge failed to grant relief to
the appellant and also failed to dispose of the I.A.No.1 of 2023
in W.P.No.891 of 2022 for impleadment of the legal
representatives of the respondent No.5 by arraying them as the
respondent Nos.6 to 10 in the Writ Petition. Learned counsel
also submits that the respondent No.5 passed away during the
pendency of the Writ Petition.
4. Upon considering the submissions and perusing the
impugned order dated 09.09.2025, we are of the view that the
appellant would not suffer any prejudice by reason of the
impugned order since the appellant has been given liberty to
submit a fresh application before the respondent
No.4/Tahsildar. Hence, nothing prevents the appellant from
raising his contentions before the respondent No.4/Tahsildar in
a fresh application. Moreover, since the legal representatives of
the respondent No.5 were not made parties to the Writ Petition,
any change in the Succession Summary dated 08.10.2021
would irrevocably impact the legal representatives of the
respondent No.5 considering the fact that the name of the
respondent No.5 already appears in the Succession Summary as
the beneficiary.
5. Hence, we deem it fit to allow I.A.No.1 of 2025 thereby
permitting the appellant/petitioner to bring the proposed
respondent Nos.6 to10 on record in the present Appeal as the
legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.5. The
respondent No.4/Tahsildar shall consider the objections raised
by the appellant/petitioner, along with the contentions of the
legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.5 before
passing a reasoned order within six months from the date on
which the fresh application/objections are received from the
appellant/petitioner.
6. I.A.No.1 of 2025 is allowed. W.A.No.1213 of 2025, along
with all connected applications, are accordingly disposed of in
terms of the above. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J
_____________________________
GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, J
DATE: 04.11.2025
RSP/EDS
