Telangana High Court
Sanga Ramakka vs The State Of Telangana on 4 September, 2025
1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
WRIT PETITION No.19252 OF 2021
O R D E R:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution
of India seeking the following relief/s:-
"... to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly
one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order passed by
the Special Tribunal, Peddapalli, in Case No.D1/1293/2020/Tribunal
Case No.LDM2000033923 dated 21-06-2021 as illegal, arbitrary,
contrary to law against the provisions of the Telangana Rights in
Land and Pattadar Passbook Act, 2020 and also violation of Articles
21 and 300-A of the constitution of India, besides being violative of
principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and
pass such other order or orders ..."
2. Heard Mr.Madas Bharat Chandra, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.Sandeep Goud, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for Revenue representing learned Government Pleader for
Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 6.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the father of the
petitioner namely Kandula Lingaiah was the absolute owner and
possessor of the lands admeasuring Ac.0.39 guntas in
Sy.No.48/C, Ac.0.32 guntas in Sy.No.48/D, Acs.3.15½ guntas in
Sy.No.50 situated at Kukkalagudur Village, Palakurthi Mandal of
Peddapally District along with other lands; that after the demise
of petitioners' father, the petitioner, being the sole legal heir
succeeded the above said lands. Accordingly, the petitioner's
name was mutated in the revenue records and Pattedar Pass
books was issued in her favour; that the Telangana Government
has introduced Land Record updating project and issued new
Pattedar Passbooks to land holders. Accordingly, the petitioner
herein was issued new pattedar passbook but the subject lands
were deleted in the said new pattedar passbook; that on enquiry
the petitioner came to know that the above subject lands were
recorded in the new pattedar passbook of respondent Nos.7 and
8, without issuing any prior notice to the petitioner which is
against the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and
Pattadar and Pass Book Act, 2020; that under the Land Records
Updating Programme, no change of passbook entries can be
made and if any changes are to be made, recourse under section
5(5) or 9 has to be taken.
4. It is further stated that respondent No.6, before carrying
out any amendment in record of rights is bound to issue notice in
writing to all the persons whose names are entered in the records
of rights and no such notice was served on the petitioner; that on
24.01.2020, the petitioner had made an application under the
Right to Information Act seeking to know the reason for deletion
of the above subject lands in the new pattedar pass book and the
basis for issuance of pattadar passbooks to respondent Nos. 1
and 2; that on dated 27.01.2020 the petitioner had also made
another application to respondent No.6 seeking to rectify the said
wrong entries and record the said subject lands in the passbook
of the petitioner; that on 12.02.2020 respondent No. 6 had issued
a memo stating that the application of the petitioner dated
24.01.2020 does not disclose the file number and as such they
are unable to give information for the same; that the respondent
No. 6 without having any valid documents, without carrying out
mutation proceedings and without conducting any enquiry has
deleted the name of the petitioner and recorded the names of
respondent Nos.7 and 8 contrary to the provisions of the
Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2020.
Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has preferred an Appeal before
respondent No. 5 seeking to rectify the revenue records with
respect to the afore cited lands situated at Kukkalagudur Village,
Palakurthi Mandal of Peddapally District and to issue new
pattedar passbooks to the petitioner by recording the above
mentioned lands and to cancel the pattedar pass books issued in
favour of respondent Nos.7 and 8. The appeal was allowed on
21.07.2020 vide Appeal No.B2/1047/2020 dated 21.07.2020 on
the file the Appellate Authority & Revenue Divisional Officer,
Peddapalli/respondent No.5. Against which, respondent Nos.7
and 8 have preferred a Revision.
5. The Revision Petition was transferred to the Special
Tribunal as per Section 16 of the Telangana Rights in Land and
Pattedar Pass Books Act, 2020. The Special Tribunal passed the
orders on 10-02-2021. But relying on the order passed by this
Court in WP (PIL) No.20 of 2021 the matter was again taken up
giving opportunity to both the sides; that respondent no. 6, has
submitted the enquiry report to respondent No. 5, wherein the
respondents themselves have stated that they have never
cultivated the above mention lands and the entries in the pahani
in possession column are paper entries; that the petitioner has
leased the land to Kandula Ramaiah S/o.Agaiah for cultivation of
land from past 20 years; that the allegation of respondent Nos.7
and 8 is that they have purchased the land from the father of the
petitioner; that when the petitioner had denied the title of
respondent Nos.7 and 8 they filed the Suit for Declaration of Title
and recovery of possession vide O.S No.1103 of 1988 against the
petitioner's father on the file of the learned District Munsiff, at
Sultanabad which shows that the unofficial respondent Nos.7
and 8 were never in possession of the said land; that the Special
Tribunal had no power to execute a civil decree and the revenue
records maintained under ROR Act are not conclusive; that
respondent Nos.7 and 8 are not in possession of the subject
lands and that no passbook can be issued as per Rule 26.
Further, the petitioner already had Patta to the said land from
long time. Without taking recourse to law and procedure as
contemplated no change can be affected as such the entries are
non-est in law and are liable to be set-aside; that the District
Special Tribunal without going into the issue of execution of the
Court decree by the competent Court has in fact exceeded its
jurisdiction and allowed the Revision Petition. Therefore the
petitioner sought to allow the Writ Petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
impugned order dated 21.06.2021 in Case No.D1/1293/2020/
Tribunal Case No.LDM2000033923 on the file of the Special
Tribunal under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass
Books Act, 2020, Peddapalli setting aside the order passed by the
Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddapalli in File No.B2/1047/2020,
dated 21.07.2020 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of
natural justice. Therefore, he seeks to allow the Writ Petition.
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits
that the civil proceedings are in favour of unofficial respondent
Nos.7 and 8 and hence the impugned order is in accordance with
law. Therefore, he seeks to dismiss the Writ Petition.
8. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned
counsel and on perusal of the material available on record, this
Court opines that the learned District Munsiff, at Sultanabad
vide judgment dated 07.02.1989 in O.S No.1103 of 1988 decreed
the Suit for Declaration of ownership and possession of the suit
lands bearing Sy.No.48 admeasuring 2.22 guntas as of dry land,
Sy.No.50 admeasuring Ac.3.15 guntas of dry land and Sy.No.82
admeasuring Ac.0.08 gts of dry land and Sy.No.83 admeasuring
0.06 gts of dry land situated at siwar of Kukkalagudur Village
basing on the admission made by the father of the petitioner
herein in his written statement, which includes the afore cited
subject lands. The same remained unchallenged and thus,
became final. Relying on the said judgment passed in
O.S.No.1103 of 1988, the learned Special Tribunal has passed
the impugned order dated 21.06.2021 setting aside the order
dated 21.07.2020 in Appeal No.B2/1047/2020 on the file the
Appellate Authority & Revenue Divisional Officer,
Peddapalli/respondent No.5. It is pertinent to note that as
against the judgment passed by the civil Court the R.D.O. had
erroneously passed his order, without their being any
power/authority vested in him which is an irregularity. Therefore,
this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the
impugned order and the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
9. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No
costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________
E.V. VENUGOPAL, J
Date: 04.09.2025
ESP
