← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/3117/2025disposed of no costs

R Sanjeev Reddy v. The State Of Telangana

2025-02-18T.Madhavi Devi7 pages

[ 32ee ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEIVIBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION NO: 38117 OF 2025 Between:

Mohammad Zubair Uddin, S/o Late Mohammad Saleem Uddin, Aged about 42years, Occ Private Employee, R/o. H.No.8-4-81/A, Tolichowki, Hyderabad, Telangana.

PETITIONER AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat at B.R.K.R. Bhavan, Hyderabad. The District Collector, Sangareddy District At Sangareddy. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy Division, Sangareddy District. RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not issuing certified copies of Complete file bearing (1) No. G|1109711975 which includes Form-|, Form-ll and order, in (2) File No.

G1713511975, Succession, Pahanis as sought through petitioner's RTI Application dated 15-09-2025 as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of law and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to furnish certified copies of Complete file bearing (1) No. Gt11}g7t1975 which includes Form-|, Form-ll and order, in (2) File No.G/713511975, Succession, Pahanis in the interest of justice.

lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 3rd respondent to issue certified copies of complete file bearing (1) No. Gl11097l1grs which includes Form-t, Form-ll and order, in (2) File No'G/713511975, succession, Pahanis to the petitioner, forthwith in the interest of justice.

counsel for the petitioner: sRr MOHAMMED OMATRUDDTN srDDteur counsel for the Respondents: sRt L.RAVTNDER, AGp FoR REVENUE, REp. FOR GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER

t,'

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.38117 of2O25 Dated: LL.L2.2O25 Between:

Mohammad Zubair Uddin ... Petitioner And The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary and two others ... Respondents

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:- u... to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3.d respondent in not issuing certified copies of Complete file bearing (1) No.G/1L09711975 which includes Form-I, Form-II and order, in {21 File No.G/713511975, Succession, Pahanis as sought through petitioner's RTI Application dated l5-O9-2O25 as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of law and consequently direct the 3.d respondent to furnish certified copies of Complete file bearing (1) No. Gl|LO9T/1975 which includes Form-I, Form-ll and order, in

(2) File No.G/7L351L975, Succession, Pahanis in the interest of justice and be pleased to pass such other order or orders as deemed fit in the interests ofjustice".

2.

Heard Mr.Mohd. Omairuddin Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents. Perused the record.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed an RTI Application dated 15.O9.,2025 before respondent No.3 seeking certified copies of documents i.e., file bearing (1) No. Glllo97 l',975 which includes Form-I, Form-ll and order, in (2) File No.G/7I35/1975, Succession, Pahanis. Despite lapse of thirty (3o) days as mandated under section 7(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2oo5 (for short, "the Act") respondent No.3 failed to furnish the certified copies. It is further stated that instead of issuing certified copies, respondent No.3 merely furnished an informal letter stating that "copy of the complete file No.Gl7L35/1975 is herewith enclosed (Xerox copy)" rvhich neither satisfies the definition of "information" under Section 2(f) of the Act nor the right to obtain certified copies under section 2(11 of the Act.

It is stated that the certified copies of the afore cited documents are required for filing in the civil suit vide o.S.No.S7 of 2ol9 before the learned principal District Judge, Medak, at sanga Reddy (for short, "the trial court"), wherein the petitioner is plaintiff No.2. It is further submitted that the deliberate withholding of the said documents is causing prejudice to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition.

J / 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court vide order dated 07.07.2025 in C.R.P.No .3466 of 2024 directed as follows:- "This Court vide order dated O8-ll-2O24, in C.R.P.No.3466 of 2024 directed the II Additional District Judge, Sangareddy, to dispose of suit O.S.No.57 of 2019, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. The II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy, through the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy, addressed letter dated L7-06-2025 to the Registrar (Judicial) seeking extension of time till the end of 2O25 for disposal of Suit in OS.No.57 of 2019. In view of the aforesaid letter this application is ordered and time for disposal of suit in OS.No.S7 of 20 19, is extended by another four more months."

Relying on the afore cited order, he submits that the certified copies of the aforesaid documents are very much required for filing as material papers before the trial Court. Hence, he seeks to pass appropriate orders.

5.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue seeks a direction to the petitioner to file an appropriate application as per Rule 11 of the Telangana Bhu Bharati (Record of Rights in Land) Rules, 2025 (for short, "the Rules"). Hence, he seeks to dismiss the Writ Petition.

6.

For better understanding Section 2(ixiii) of the Right to \ Information Act, 2005 is extracted as hereunder:- \ ,,.,.1 -.

o Section 2fi): "right to information" means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes the right to:

Inspection of work, documents, records;

Taking notes, extracts, or certified copies of documents or records; Taking certified samples of material;

(i) (i i) (iii) 7.

Having regard to the submissions of both the learned counsel and on perusal of the material avarfable on record, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner ought to have filed an appropriate application as per the Rules seeking the said relief. In view of the sarne, petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate application, as per law. However, in the meantime, respondent No.3 is directed to furnish the certified copies of the documents as per section 20)(iii) of the Act in respect of Merno issued vide Lr.No.A4/8113/2025 dated 04.12.2025 to ,1" petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

8. with the above direction, this writ Petition is disposed of. No costs Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed Sd/. P.C.SULEKHA DEVI ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY/ To, SE OFFICER

1. Jl''" Principal peqre-!!u, Revenue Department, secretariat at B.R.K.R. Bhavan, Hyderabad, Staie of Telangana. '

2. The District collector, Sangareddy District At sangareddy. 3' The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy Division, Sangareddy District. 4- one cc to SRI MOHAMMED oMAtRUDDtN stDDteur Advocate topucl 5' Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

6. Two CD Copies M '.:a:j-:.: r- :- - fi-_=ilBrilHatEal -._-.-::.--f:r..]:...'...:]i-:'={j:::r.-....-...'...,|1;.-:...:

t / HIGH COURT DATED:1111212025 i.{ E: i_i T,rr ,a:

ORDER

r1 12 Bt!ffi WP.No.381 17 of 2025 * i)r c-'ir I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS