V. Prakash Reddy vs State Of Telangana
2026 Latest Caselaw 291 Tel

Telangana High Court

V. Prakash Reddy vs State Of Telangana on 1 April, 2026

Author: B. Vijaysen Reddy

Bench: B. Vijaysen Reddy

     IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
                     AT HYDERABAD
         HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
                   WRIT PETITION No.9668 OF 2026

                             DATE:01-04-2026
Between:
V. Prakash Reddy
                                                     .... Petitioner
                                    AND
The State of Telangana,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department,
Secretariat, Hyderabad,
and three others.
                                                     ... Respondents

ORDER:

(ORAL)

The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of respondent No.3 in

rejecting the Bhu Bharati application No.2500165661 dated

30.12.2025 in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.1-08 guntas in

Survey No.5/2/1 situated at Gadwal Village and Mandal, Jogulamba

Gadwal District.

2. It is submitted that the grandfather of the petitioner was the

absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Acs.3-26

guntas in Survey No.5 of Gadwal Village and Mandal, Jogulamba

Gadwal District. That after the death of the grandfather of the

petitioner, the father of the petitioner viz., V. Satyanarayana Reddy

and his brothers partitioned the land. In the partition, the land to an ::2::

extent of Acs.1-08 guntas fell to the share of the father of the

petitioner, and his name was recorded in the pahanies. The father of

the petitioner died on 23.09.1983 leaving behind the petitioner and

others as his legal heirs.

3. It is submitted that without prior notice, the name of the

father of the petitioner was deleted from the revenue records in

respect of the subject land that fell to his share. The petitioner made

application No.2500165661 dated 30.12.2025 for restoring the name

of his father in the revenue records. The application was rejected

without assigning any reasons.

4. Heard Mr. Gudi Madhusudhan Reddy, learned counsel for

the petitioner; and Mr. L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government

Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondents, and perused the

material available on record.

5. The rejection order filed as Ex.P1 shows that no reasons

have been assigned for rejection of the application of the petitioner. It

is a settled principle of law that when an order is passed by a quasi-

judicial authority determining the rights of the parties and whereby

rights of the parties are affected, it is incumbent upon the authority to

record the reasons. Thus, for the sole reason of impugned order ::3::

being passed without recording reasons and in violation of principles

of natural justice, it is liable to be set aside.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned

rejection order is set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to re-

consider the Bhu Bharati application No.2500165661 dated

30.12.2025 of the petitioner, for incorporating the name of his father in

the revenue records in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.1-08

guntas in Survey No.5/2/1 situated at Gadwal Village and Mandal,

Jogulamba Gadwal District, by issuing notice to the petitioner and

other interested persons and by affording an opportunity of hearing to

them, and pass orders, in accordance with law, within a period of six

(06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall

be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in

this writ petition, shall stand closed.

_____________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J Date: 01.04.2026 vv