Telangana High Court
Vankayalapati Bhavani vs The State Of Telangana on 19 November, 2025
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
AND
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No.1280 OF 2025
Mr. Naresh Vankayalapati, learned counsel appearing for the appellants.
Mr. Muralidhar Reddy Katram, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for
the respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Mr. K. Ramakotaiah, learned counsel representing Ms. Ch. Sravani, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent No.5.
JUDGMENT:
(Per Hon'ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)
1. The Writ Appeal arises out of an order dated 14.07.2025
passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Review I.A.No.5 of
2025 in W.P.No.20810 of 2024.
2. The respondent No.5 herein filed the Writ Petition against the
inaction of the State-respondents in failing to dispose of the
representation dated 18.01.2021 and the online application dated
22.07.2024 made by the writ petitioner, requesting mutation of her
name in the Revenue Records and issuance of Pattadar Passbook and
Title Deeds in relation to the property, admeasuring Acs.0.21 guntas,
situated in Survey No.127/A4 of Arempula Village, Khammam Rural
Mandal and District. By an order dated 01.08.2024, the learned
Single Judge heard both the parties and disposed of the Writ Petition
by directing the respondent No.2/the District Collector, Khammam,
to consider the writ petitioner's online application dated 22.07.2024
and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law by putting the
writ petitioner and all affected parties on notice and affording them
an opportunity of hearing. The entire exercise was to be completed
within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the
order dated 01.08.2024.
3. The appellant herein, who was the respondent No.5 in the Writ
Petition, filed the Review Application seeking review of the order
dated 01.08.2024 on the ground that the writ petitioner had
suppressed material facts and thereby obtained the order dated
01.08.2024. By the impugned order dated 14.07.2025, the learned
Single Judge opined that the writ petitioner had indeed suppressed
certain material facts in the writ affidavit and had obtained the order
dated 01.08.2024. The learned Single Judge accordingly allowed the
Review Application, recalled the order dated 01.08.2024 and restored
the Writ Petition to its original file.
4. Although learned counsel appearing for the appellant
(respondent No.5 in the Writ Petition) submits that the appellant is
aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge in
restoring the Writ Petition to its original file and in failing to make
appropriate orders regarding the alleged benefit enjoyed by the writ
petitioner from 01.08.2024 to 14.07.2024, we are unable to
comprehend this argument since the appellant will now have an
opportunity to address her grievance and all material points before
the appropriate Court, which is now seized of the matter. We do not
find that the appellant/review applicant has suffered any prejudice.
5. W.A.No.1280 of 2025, along with all connected applications, is
accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J
_____________________________
GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, J
Date: 19.11.2025
va
