← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/13403/2018dismissed no costs

A.V. Elamurugu v. The State Of Telangana

2018-04-18P Naveen Rao3 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.13403 OF 2018 DATED :18.04.2018 Between :

A.V.Elamurugu S/o.Gannamani, Aged 50 yrs, Occu : Agriculture & Business, R/o.D.No.1-7-878/15, Jayasree Enclave, Hunter Road, Hanamkonda, Warangal-500 001 .. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, through its Principal Secretary, (Revenue), Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.

.. Respondents This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.13403 OF 2018 ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 2.

On an application filed by the petitioner to the Tahsildar to issue pattadar pass books on land to an extent of Ac.4.00 in Sy.No.118/2, Acs.7.00 in Sy.No.156 and Ac.4.00 in Sy.No.118 of Mondrai village, the same was rejected by the Tahsildar vide his memo dated 13.06.2016 assigning reasons in support of his decision.

3.

Without availing the appropriate remedy as available in law, aggrieved by the order of Tahsildar dated 13.06.2016, petitioner went on making representations in Prajavani, which is a general redressal mechanism created by the Government. In response to the representation made in Prajavani before the District Collector, Tahsildar addressed letter dated 10.01.2018 to the District Collector, informing the factual position. This letter is under challenge in this writ petition. The letter of Tahsildar is an internal correspondence placing the relevant facts assessed by him before the District Collector. An adverse decision is already made by the Tahsildar on 13.06.2016. This writ petition cannot be instituted challenging the internal correspondence between two authorities and the same is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. Futhermore, as observed earlier, a decision was already made and if petitioner is aggrieved, he has to work out his remedies.

- 3 - 4.

Thus, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his remedies as available in law, if so advised, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 18th April, 2018 Note : Issue c.c. in one week.

B/o.

Rds