Durgam Laxmi v. State Of Telangana

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.18262 OF 2019 Date:23.08.2019 Between:

Durgam Laxmi W/o.Late D.Pocham, Aged about 74 yrs, Occu : Housewife, R/o.H.No.11-57, Buradagudem, Mandamarri Mandal, Mancherial District.

.....Petitioner And State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.

.....Respondents The Court made the following:

- 2 - HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.18262 of 2019 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3.

2.

Petitioner claims to be the successor to Durgam Pocham. The father of Durgam Pocham was Durgam Lasmaiah. Land to an extent of Ac.2-30 guntas in Sy.No.3 of Piki P , of Akennapally Village, Bellampally Mandal, Mancherial District, stood in the name of Durgam Lasmaiah. After the death of Durgam Lasmaiah, husband of petitioner Durgam Pocham made application to grant Virasat in his name and even before it was granted, he died on 27.11.2016. After the death of her husband, petitioner claimed to be in possession. While so, petitioner came to know that Durgam Lingaiah claiming as son of Durgaiah Lasmaiah got his name entered in the revenue records in the place of Durgam Lasmaiah. Having come to know of the same and after obtaining succession certificate, petitioner applied to Tahsildar to mutate her name in the place of Durgam Lasmaiah. In pursuant to the application made, Tahsildar issued notice on 20.05.2019 calling upon the persons to file objections. Alleging inaction by the Tahsildar, this writ petition is filed.

3.

Apparently, there are rival claims and Durgam Lingaiah-4th respondent got his name mutated in the revenue records against the above extent of land. Once the name is already mutated claiming as successor to the original lavoni patta holder by name Durgam Lasmaiah by Sri Durgam Lingaiah, Tahsildar is not competent to entertain any such application and has no power to

- 3 - undertake review of his decision. Notice issued by the Tahsildar on 20.05.2019 is nothing but amounting to undertaking review of his earlier decision. Under Section 5 (5) the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act 1971') remedy of appeal is provided to the Revenue Divisional Officer against the decision of Tahsildar and revision under Section 9 of the Act, 1971 to the Collector. Thus, petitioner has to avail the remedy of appeal or revision as the case may be, as advised, but cannot go before Tahsildar and ask him to undertake the exercise to review of his earlier decision.

4.

Thus, the relief sought in the writ petition cannot be granted. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal or revision, as advised, on the allegation of illegal mutation of name of 4th respondent in the revenue records. However if appeal or revision is preferred, the competent authority may consider the same as expeditiously, as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of appeal or revision. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 23rd August, 2019 Rds