← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/1944/2019dismissed

Bangaru Seetharamulamma v. The State Of T.S

2019-02-11Sanjay Kumar2 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.1944 of 2019 ORDER:

The grievance of the petitioner is that the Tahsildar, Penpahad Mandal, Suryapet District, is not entering her name in the online revenue records in relation to the land admeasuring Ac.1.21 guntas, being an extent of Ac.0.20 guntas in R.S.No.6/A3; Ac.0.29 guntas in R.S.No.8/A3 and Ac.0.12 guntas in R.S.No.68 of Potalapahad Village, Penpahad Mandal, Suryapet District.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, State of Telangana, received written instructions from the Tahsildar, Penpahad Mandal, under letter dated 06.02.2019, wherein the Tahsildar stated that the said land in Survey Nos.6/A3 and 8/A3 belonged to Bangaru Venkaiah, the father of the petitioner. She further stated that the land in Survey No.68 did not belong to Bangaru Venkaiah as mentioned by the petitioner. According to the Tahsildar, after the death of Bangaru Venkaiah, the names of his sons, Bangaru Sathyanarayana and Bangaru Linga Chary, were entered in the revenue records. She further stated that Bangaru Sathyanarayana also expired and the lands, which were mutated in his name, were thereafter mutated in favour of his legal heirs.

In the light of the aforestated entries made in the revenue records, it would not be open to the petitioner to approach the Tahsildar, Penpahad Mandal, with a request to enter her name in the revenue records on the strength of an alleged Will Deed executed in her favour by her father, late Bangaru Venkaiah. If the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the entries already made in the revenue records, she is provided with an efficacious alternative remedy under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971.

to resolve such issues in a writ petition and all the more so, when the family members of the petitioner are not even impleaded in this writ petition.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to take recourse to the statutory remedies available to her in accordance with law.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR Date:11.02.2019 GJ