S. Laxmi v. The State Of Telangana And 3 Others

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.23111 OF 2019 Date: 20.11.2019 Between:

S.Laxmi W/o.Late Lingam, Aged 60 yrs, Occu : Household, R/o.H.No.3-5-30/F, Bharath Nagar, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad & others.

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

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

- 2 - THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.23111 OF 2019 ORDER:

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

According to petitioners late S.Lingam was the owner of lands to an extent of Ac.16-02 guntas in Sy.Nos.313, 314 and 322 of Pratapsingaram Village, Ghatkesar Mandal which was acquired by him through registered sale deeds dated 24.08.1996, 31.01.1997 and 01.07.1997. His name was mutated in the revenue records and was issued pattadar pass books and title deeds. Petitioners claim that the vendor has valid title and the same was transferred to the father of petitioners, late S.Lingam. However, alleging that there is violation of provisions of the A.P.Assigned Lands (POT) Act 1977 (for short 'the Act, 1977'), proceedings were initiated culminating in adverse order passed by the Tahsildar, vide order dated 28.10.2009. Aggrieved thereby, appeal was preferred before the Revenue Divisional Officer. During pendency of appeal Sri S.

Lingam died and therefore, his legal heirs came on record and by order dated 18.05.2016, the appeal was allowed directing the Tahsildar to conduct denovo enquiry by giving opportunity to the interested persons. Consequent to remand, the Tahsildar passed orders on 07.04.2018 holding that lands to an extent of Ac.16-02 guntas in Sy.Nos.313, 314 and 322 do not attract the provisions of the Act, 1977. In view thereof, the lands became the private property of petitioners.

- 3 - representations to mutate their names in the revenue records and to issue pattadar pass books and title deeds. 3.

Petitioners made several representations. Alleging inaction on the representations, this writ petition is filed. This Court is informed that no appeal is preferred against the said decision of Tahsildar, and the same has become final.

4.

Apparently, petitioners have not filed application in Form VI-A through online web portal, requesting to mutate their names in the revenue records. In view of the fact that by the time, Sri S.Lingam died, the order of Tahsildar was subsisting and the appeal was pending before the RDO.

5.

Therefore, granting liberty to the petitioners to file applications for mutation of their names in the revenue records, concerning the above extents of land, the Writ Petition is disposed of. If the applications are filed by the petitioners, the same shall be considered by the competent authority and appropriate decision be made, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of such applications. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 20th November, 2019 Rds