Dharawat Nageswara Rao v. The State Of Telangana
[ 31681 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO: 12993 OF 2024 Between:
ged about 51 Years, Occ.
Ananthagiri Mandal, Suryapet Dharawat Nageswara Rao, S/o Pantulu, A Agriculture, R/o Bojja Gudem Thanda Village, District.
...PETITIONER AND
1. The State of Telangana, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad - 500 022. Represented by its Principal Secretary.
2. The District Collector, Suryapet District, Suryapet - 508 213, Telangana State.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kodad Revenue Division, Kodad Suryatpet District - 508 206, T.S.
4. The Tahsildar, Ananthagiri Mandal, Ananthagiri - 508 206, Suryapet District, Telangana state ...RESP.NDENTS 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 a Writ, Order or Direction particularly a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No. 3 which are signed by respondent No.4 in rejecting the applications of ttre petitioner 'vide Nos. C 12300035352 and C12300035356 by remarks dated. 061O412024 stating that there is no clear direction to unblock petitioners lands i.e., land in Sy. No. 738/AA2 to an extentG land is Ac. 1-18 Guntas and land in Survey No. 739/42 to an extent of land is Ac.
t 1-37 Guntas in Ahanthagiri Revenue Village and Mandal, Suryapet District as arbitrary, illegal-and set the same aside and consequently direct the respondents to remove the lands in Sy. No. 738lAA2 to an extent.of land is Ac. 1-18 Guntas and land in Survey No. 739/42 to an extent of land is Ac.
lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,.the High Cou( may be pleased to direct the respondents to remove the lands in Sy. No. 738lAA2 to an extent of land is Ac. 't-18 Guntas and land in Survey No. 739/42 to an extent of land is Ac. 1-37 Guntas in Ahanthagiri Revenue Village and Mandal, Suryapet District of the petitioner from the prohibition list forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T. P. ACHARYA Counsel for Respondents: SRI SOMU SRINIVAS, AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI WSTICE K. LAKSHMAN U'RIT PETITION No,12993 of 2024 ORDER:
Heard Sri T.P.Acharya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Somu Srinivas Reddy, learned Assistant Government: Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents. Perused the record.
The case of the petitioner is that one Mr.Kamatham Pullaiah, S/o.Narayana, has filed a suit vide O.S.No.1 of 2016 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Huzurnagar, against the petitioner and his father seeking specihc performance of the Agreement of Sale dated O5.O3.2O13. The said suit was decreed on 15.09.2016. Thereafter, the said Mr.Kamatham Pullaiah, has filed an Execution Petition vide E.P.No.8 of 2Ol7 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Huzurnagar. During the pendency of the said execution petition, the plaintiff and the defendant therein have entered into compromise and the matter was settled. In proof of the same, he has filed copy of the docket order dated LO.O7.2C23 in E.P.No.8 of 2OL7 and withdrawal
of the memo hled by decree holder/plaintiff. The said property is mentioned in the prohibited list. Thereafter, the petitioner herein has submitted online application with I.D.No.C12300035356 to delete the said property from prohibited list. The said online application was rejected by the 2"d respondent on the ground that there is no clear direction in the said order to delete the said properQr from the prohibited list.
The said rejection order is not on consideration of the aforesaid aspects. The parties have settled the claims in E.P.No.8 of 2OI7 and the docket order dated LO.O7.2023 reveals the said fact.
Without considering the said aspects, the 2"d respondent rejected the said online application submitted by the petitioner. The said rejection is not on sound/proper reasons and it is not on consideration of the aforesaid aspects more particularly compromise entered between the petitioner, his father and plaintiff therein.
In light of the same, the said rejection order is remanded back to the 2"d set aside and the matter is consider the aforesaid online respondent with a direction to I.D.No.C123OOO35356 and Pass application bearing strictly in accordance with law bY approPriate orders on notice and affording putting the Petitioner an opportunity. If respondent No'2 is not inclined to accept the request of the petitioner' he shall assign specific reasons' pass a reasoned order and shall communicate copy of the said order to the petitioner. He shall comprete the aforesaid entire exercise within a period of eight (O8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' There shall be no order as to costs'
sequel, the miscellaneous petitions' if any'
Asa pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed' RI SD/-A.v.s. P ASSISTANT REGIS /ITRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To'lll3Rt13il3?lf,?ii.fi :8'F,gl?:ffi SJg",[8';?[ffi l'd"J3:9",ffi"8:T' District - 508 206, T.S
3. The Tahsildar, Ananthagiri Mandal, Ananthagiri - 508 206, Suryapet District' Telanoana State.
one clc to Sri T P Acharya Advocate [oPUCI ir;j" cc"i" cp ror nevenuelil-igh c6,,t io.itt" State of Telangana [oUT] Two CD Copies MBC LS w
/ / I I I HIGH COURT DATED: 0310512024 \ \1c r,A/ti.> L) 1 6 t,]AY 2021 Pz .L o lisp/1.TC\.:-
ORDER
WP,No.12993 ot 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION @Cclt q'
&--* WITHOUT COSTS