Pala Subhashini vs The State Of Telangana
2025 Latest Caselaw 5264 Tel

Telangana High Court

Pala Subhashini vs The State Of Telangana on 2 September, 2025

Author: K. Lakshman

Bench: K. Lakshman

     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

              WRIT PETITION No.26014 of 2025

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri L.Ravinder,

learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on

behalf of the respondents.

2. According to the petitioners, there is a missing extent in the

latest passbooks. Therefore, they have submitted a representation

dated 07.07.2025 to respondent No.2, with a request to correct the

wrong entries and to issue fresh E-Pattadar Passbooks. Despite

receiving and acknowledging the said representation, respondent

No.2 did not take any action. Aggrieved by the said inaction of

respondent No.2, the present writ petition is filed.

3. The petitioners rely on the final judgment and decree dated

01.02.1983 in I.A. No.113 of 1975 in O.S. No.76 of 1968, passed

by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

4. The petitioners and one Sri Manohar Reddy filed a suit in

O.S.No.76 of 1968 against Sri Buchi Reddy and two others for

partition and separate possession of the suit schedule A to D

properties therein. A preliminary decree was passed on 30.01.1971,

and the final decree proceedings were passed on 01.02.1983.

5. It is the specific contention of the petitioners that certain

extents are missing in the latest passbooks and title deeds issued by

respondent No.2. Therefore, they have submitted a representation

dated 07.07.2025, requesting correction of the wrong entries. The

petitioners specifically mentioned the missing extents and also

filed copies of the preliminary and final decree proceedings.

6. Rule 8 of the Telangana Bhu Bharati (Record of Rights in

Land) Rules, 2025 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules, 2025')

prescribes the procedure for mutation based on an order or decree

passed by a competent court of law. As per Rule 8, sub-rule (6), the

Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) is the competent authority, and

is required to conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders

within thirty days from the date of service of notice. Accordingly,

the petitioners are required to submit an online application to the

concerned RDO along with all the relevant documents, including

the aforementioned preliminary and final decrees. Upon receipt of

the same, the concerned RDO shall consider and dispose of the

application in accordance with law.

7. In light of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition is

disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioners to submit an online

application to the concerned RDO, along with all the relevant

documents, with a request to include the missing extents. Upon

receipt of the said application, the RDO shall consider and dispose

of the same strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed

under the Rules, 2025, by putting the petitioner and all interested

parties including the defendants to the said suit on notice and

affording them an opportunity. There shall be no order as to costs.

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

stand closed.

_____________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J

02.09.2025 Note: Issue C.C. in one week b/o.

sa